RE: [plcs-tog] Next telecon?

Title: Next telecon?

We also need to resolve the fairly major
issue of how to represent reference data templates e.g. assigning_codes / assigning_reference_data,
assigning_business_reference_data that I raised in an earlier email (attached)

 

Regards

Rob

-----Original Message-----

From: Nigel Newling
[mailto:] 

Sent: 28 October 2005 09:53

To: ''

Subject: [plcs-tog] Next telecon?

 

We
seem to have lost the programme of teleconferences that was proposed in
Glasgow. Now that work has commenced on DEX 4, with a good prospect of a start
on DEX 1 & 8 as well, there is now an urgent need for a forum to address
the cloud of issues that the work is throwing up. These range from the simple
typo or spelling mistake through to the detailed technical, but all need to be
resolved if we are to get DEXs reliably into use. Some merely require
commitment of the document editor to correct, others will require direction
from the TOG

I
attach a spreadsheet to demonstrate the problems I face as Team Leader, Team 4.
Most of the entries will shortly re-appear as issues raised against
Capabilities , but some will have to be brought to the TOG. I have decided,
however, to release the spreadsheet now to give TOG members a 'head-up' on the
amount and nature of issues that will have to be resolved before the end of the
year if I am to hold to the implementation programme currently in planned for
MoD / DML.

Nigel

<<cap_entity_issues.xls>> 

N F
Newling BSc CEng MIEE 

Executive
Consultant, LSC Group 

P.O.
Box 77, 

Devonport
House, Durley Park, 

Keynsham,
Bristol 

BS31
2YH 

Tel :
+44 117 916 1651 

Mobile
: +44 7734 742975 

 

DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY
MARKED***   The information in this message is confidential and may
be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.  Access to
this message by anyone else is unauthorised.  If you are not the intended
recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any
action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be
unlawful.  Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this
message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England
& Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport,
Plymouth, PL1 4SG 

 

--- Begin Message ---

From: "Rob Bodington" <>

To: <>

Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:12:18 +0100

Hi

I have just raised this major issue
capabilities/assigning_reference_data/dvlp/issues.xml#RBN-7

against assigning_reference_data

 

<!--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -->

<issue

   id="RBN-7"

   type="general"

   status="open"

   category="minor_technical"

   by="Rob Bodington"

   date="05-10-25">

<description>

There are currently three templates specifying different
ways of assigning reference data:

assigning_business_specific_reference_data

assigning_reference_data

assigning_code

 

Assigning_reference_data is used by default in most
templates that need reference data

e.g. assigning_organization.

 

However,  in different situations, each of the three
approaches to

assigning reference data is appropriate. This then raises
the question as

to how to represent this within a template such as assigning_organization.

 

 

Option 1) We could have three templates for assigning_organization.
One

for each use of reference data. This would not really
address the problem

as any template using assigning_organization has the same
problem. 

 

Option 2) We could exclude the assigning_reference_data from

templates. This has a disadvantage in that the reference
data may be

inconsistently applied or not applied.

 

Option 3) Always use assigning_reference_data in other
templates. Document

the fact that when assigning_reference_data is used

either assigning_business_specific_reference_data, or assigning_codes
could

be used instead. In fact, it could be argued, that only

assigning_business_specific_reference_data or assigning_codes
should be

used. As both have the same template arguments, we avoid any
problems.

Perhaps we need a special parameter set for class
information that

indicates whether the class is standard, business or a code.

Furthermore, the instantiation patterns of

assigning_business_specific_reference_data and assigning_codes
are

different, one uses classification_assignment to relate two
classes, the

other uses Subset - they should use the same. 

 

</description>

Regards

Rob

-------------------------------------------   

Rob Bodington

Eurostep Limited

Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com

Email:


Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030

Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401

 

--- End Message ---