Re: New UML diagram based on WD31 schema - for Sept 25 TC meeting

All --

      

      Copying the list - this is for the agenda for today.

      

      Since sending the email below (and the attached diagram) I
      realized several things:

      

      (a) All attributes in XSD are optional; the Enterprise Architect
      UML tooling I use doesn't get this right on import.

      (b) Are attributes 0..1 or 0..*?  Clearly 0 (optional) is the
      lower bound.

      (c) If there are no attributes expressed, there's still an Obj
      instance. Is this right? Are there needed constraints?

      (d) Optionality and emptiness: if there's no ts attribute, there's
      no tagspace applied. If there is, should ts be initialized?

      (e) What's the difference between the absence of (say) "writable"
      and having "writable" exist and initialized to false?

      (f) UML basic types should be used in UML; the mix of XSD and UML
      types is a bit strained. Key places are the dateTime/etc areas -
      I've solved this in the UML for the WS-Calendar PIM by conformed
      strings, so they're all of type String. In XSD they're specific
      types.

      (g) The places where an attribute is required AND initialized (see
      Str - val: String = "" as initial value) seem odd; in what sense
      does initialization apply, and what does it mean during the
      transition from "nothingness to being"?

      

      Talk to you at the meeting shortly.

      

      Thanks!

      

      bill

      --

      
William Cox
        

        Email: 
        

        Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
        

        +1 862 485 3696 mobile
        

        

      

      On 9/24/14 11:46 PM, William Cox wrote:

    

    
      
      Craig and Toby --

      

      I've attached the WD31 UML diagram as a 400dpi PNG. Scale as
      needed to fit in the spec.

      

      I used the obix-v1_1_WD31.xsd Toby uploaded to produce this. The
      beautification attempt cannot be blamed on the schema.

      

      There are some modeling issues:

      

      (1) The XSD types are embedded in the earlier diagram; I've done
      the following:

      
        
Used the UML primitive types for Boolean, String, Integer,
          Real instead of boolean, string, int, and double

        
Used the XSD NMTOKEN and anyURI (these should probably both
          be conformed Strings)

        
Left the XSD dateTime and date and time types - I could
          define those as in the WS-Calendar PIM as conformed strings;
          that's what they are, but I don't think that level of
          persnicketiness (sp?) is useful

        
obix:Nil is used only as a literal default/initial value and
          seems otherwise undefined. Not sure whether this is an issue
          in the XSD

        
obix:obj is used in the same way; same issues - but it's a
          defined element of type Obj. Confused. It's a default for
          contract. It's also an xs:any in a different namespace with
          lax process Contents.  Huh? "contract" is an alias for
          "anyURI" so how come it's xs:any in several places??

        

      
      
(2) I note that several classes have additional attributes and
        there are some related issues.

      

      
        
Should ts have a default value of "" (the empty string)?

        
Enum has "range" added

        
Int has added "unit"

      
      
So this diagram is pretty close to valid UML; the gaps are
        dateTime, date, time, etc (easy to fix if it needs to be fixed).
        The use of obix:obj and Nil need discussion.  And perhaps (since
        the xsd is the basis) I should go back from the UML types to the
        XSD types for boolean, int, etc.

      

      
Thanks!

      

      
bill

      

      
-- 

        William Cox 

        Email: 
        

        Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
        

        +1 862 485 3696 mobile 

      

    
    

  

Attachment:
Obj and Subclasses.png

Description: PNG image