UR VR and VM Inconsistency in DICOM Standards

[David Liu]

Hi DICOM experts,

I have question regarding the UR VR and VM would appreciate clarification.

PS3.5 (2025b), Section 6.2 defines UR as single-valued: "Data Elements with this VR shall not be multi-valued."

However, PS3.6 (2025b), Tag (0010,0047) (Sex Parameters for Clinical Use Category Reference) specifies:
VR = UR
VM = 1-n (multi-valued)

Question:
Is this a conflict, or is there an exception for this specific attribute? If intentional, where is this exception documented?

Thanks in advance for your insights!
David

[Jörg Riesmeier]

Hi David,

good catch. That looks like a bug introduced in April of this year with Supplement 233 "Patient Model Gender Enhancements". As you say, Attributes with a VR of "UR" should never have a VM other than "1". 

Could you please submit a CP on this (or should I do it on your behalf)?

Regards,

Jörg

[David Liu]

Hi Jörg,

Thanks very much for the clarification! I also noticed two other data
elements with the same issue and have submitted a CP request. I’ll
keep you updated on the progress.

Best Regards,
David

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DICOM Forum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dicomforum+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dicomforum/2029952f-0858-462e-aaab-582400a19dbbn%40googlegroups.com.

[Jörg Riesmeier]

Hi David,

thank you for the feedback. A few weeks ago, I also discovered an incorrect VM for one of the DICONDE attributes in PS3.6. I have forwarded this to someone who is working on the underlying ASTM standard.

Regards,

Jörg

[Jörg Riesmeier]

I checked my emails: actually, I found two DICONDE attributes in DICOM PS3.6 with an incorrect VM (and reported it to the person working on the ASTM standards):

1) (0014,4106)  Wave Dimension Values Sequence, VR = SQ, VM = 1-n, used e.g. in the new version of ASTM E2663

2) (0014,6025)  Data Streaming Protocol, VR = ST, VM = 1-2, used e.g. in ASTM E3440-24

Of course, both attributes should have a VM of "1" (see DICOM PS3.5 for a definition of the VRs).

Regards,

Jörg

[David Liu]

Thanks, Jörg.

Those are indeed the same two attributes I noticed. Do you happen to
have a CP number for them? I’d like to inform WG6, as there may be a
duplicate CP for the two attributes- they’ll be reviewing it next
week.

Best regards,
David

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "DICOM Forum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/dicomforum/iobi9OSuEFc/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to dicomforum+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dicomforum/29c9ae4b-a0cf-48dd-992a-7b7a674cacf7n%40googlegroups.com.

[Jörg Riesmeier]

Hi David,

I did not submit a DICOM CP because the problems are caused by the ASTM DICONDE standards that define these attributes and make use of them (see above). So first, they need to be fixed there.

I found these issues when I reviewed ASTM E2663 (ballot version) and E3440-24. As I wrote, I've informed someone who is engaged in DICONDE standardization. Beginning of May, I also sent an email to David Clunie (editor of the DICOM standard) and informed him about the incorrect VM for Data Streaming Protocol (0014,6025).

Good luck with your CP.

Regards,

Jörg

[David Liu]

Hi Jörg,

Thanks much for your detailed explanation. I'll also inform WG6 about the update.

Best regards,
David

[William Sugarman]

Hey David,

Was there any update within WG6 on these inconsistencies? I see them still present in the latest 2026b. This includes:

• (0010,0047) Sex Parameters for Clinical Use Category Reference
  • VR = UR and VM = 1-n
• (0014,4106) Wave Dimension Values Sequence
  • VR = SQ and VM = 1-n
• (0014,6025) Data Streaming Protocol
  • VR = ST and VM = 1-n

All three VRs explicitly forbid a VM != 1 in 6.4 Value Multiplicity (VM) and Delimitation.

Thanks,

Will

[Jörg Riesmeier]

Hi Will,

good question. As far as I can see, DICOM CP-2559 "Correction of VM for
Inconsistent Data Elements in PS3.6" is still work in progress (the official
status is "Assigned"), but I haven't seen any progress since June last year.

The person assigned to this CP, i.e., the member of WG-06, is David Clunie, so
I'll send him an email about it.

Regards,
Jörg


-------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [DICOM Forum] Re: UR VR and VM Inconsistency in DICOM Standards
Date: Monday, April 13, 2026, 7:48:16 PM CEST
From: William Sugarman <will.s...@gmail.com>
To: DICOM Forum <dicom...@googlegroups.com>

Hey David,

Was there any update within WG6 on these inconsistencies? I see them still
present in the latest 2026b. This includes:

- (0010,0047) Sex Parameters for Clinical Use Category Reference
- VR = UR and VM = 1-n
- (0014,4106) Wave Dimension Values Sequence
- VR = SQ and VM = 1-n
- (0014,6025) Data Streaming Protocol
- VR = ST and VM = 1-n

All three VRs explicitly forbid a VM != 1 in 6.4 Value Multiplicity (VM)
and Delimitation

<https://dicom.nema.org/medical/dicom/current/output/chtml/part05/
sect_6.4.html>
.

-------------------------------------------------------------
--
Dr. Joerg Riesmeier, Etzhorner Weg 19, 26125 Oldenburg, Germany
E-Mail: di...@jriesmeier.com, Homepage: www.jriesmeier.com

[William Sugarman]

Thanks Jörg! Feel free to include me in any emails/communications too as appropriate. I'm certainly interested to learn more.