Title: OASIS PLCS TC concept model
One
feels a little giddy after a run through the slide show, but it is making good
progress. Just a few thoughts :
I
still prefer "business concept" to "component". What we are trying
to capture is a scrap of the AP 239 data model that implements a
recurring set of information, definable in a business context and
recognisable across industry pillars. The objective is provide an aid
that will lead to consistent mapping of disparate legacy data forms to a
common AP 239 rendering.
Business Exchange Specifications are unlikely to
"define" Business Reference Data, as this is a concept that is only just
starting to enter the domain. "points to the need for" may be a better
representation.
I am
not sure how a "component" leads to the development of an OASIS exchange
requirement - does the business exchange requirement not present itself
directly as a candidate for standardisation at OASIS?
Should there not be a link from "OASIS List of
Exchange Specifications"
to "OASIS DEX Specification"
along the lines of "TOG approval to
create"?
What is
added by differentiating between an "OASIS DEX Specification"
and
a "DEX Specification" ?
Suggest that a "Business Exchange
Specification" will "map to" a "DEX Specification"
What is
the difference between "OASIS Reference Data" and "PLCS Core Reference
Data"
?
Nigel
-----Original
Message-----
From: Rutland, Phil
[mailto:]
Sent: 12 October 2005 13:59
To:
'';
Subject:
[plcs-tog] OASIS PLCS TC concept model
Mats,
We
have spent some more time on the concept model and come up with a new 'UK
MoD' version (see attached). We have only done this because recreating your
version (as a slide show) made it easier to get the concepts clear in our own
minds. We have also attempted to describe some of the
'boxes'
We
offer this as a contribution to the development of the final version.
Feel free to comment on any errors, misconceptions, inconsistencies
etc.
Over
to you
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:]
Sent: 06 October 2005
08:58
To: ;
Subject: SV: [plcs-tog] OASIS PLCS
TC concept model
I like the slideshow. Excellent! Much easier to
follow.
Some remarks:
-
In my opinion, 'term' and 'name' are synonymns. A term has no definition. A
term "labels" a concept. A 'concept' has one or more terms/names
and a definition (possibly in different languages).
-
Is 'EX ...' short for EXchange or should it be 'DEX
...'?
- There are two 'ISO 10303 Application Module'
boxes.
-
I like the idea of not using the 'Business Concept' term. I'm not sure I
quite understand what you've suggested instead. Could you explain it in
words?!
Regards,
Mats
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mats Nilsson,
FMV
Från: Rutland, Phil
[mailto:]
Skickat: den 5 oktober 2005
17:22
Till: ''
Ämne:
[plcs-tog] OASIS PLCS TC concept model
All,
I've been looking at this and
come up with the attached version.
I've removed "Business Concept" and tried to
identify how OASIS DEX's are created along with the link between various
reference data levels.
It
can be viewed as a whole or in slideshow mode when it will build (my idea of
trying to explain it!).
Phil Rutland
-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:]
Sent: 03 October 2005
17:33
To:
Subject:
[plcs-tog] OASIS PLCS TC concept model
Hi all,
I was given the task in Amsterdam to produce a
first draft of a 'OASIS PLCS TC concept model' in order to help to clarify
the meaning of the terms we comunicate between us. Please feel free to
modify the document during the discussion. I do not guarantee that the
model is correct even at this basic stage. More terms should be inserted
and more connections added.
<<OASIS PLCS TC Concept
Model.ppt>>
Two thing are worth
mentioning:
1- A suggestion from the TOG meeting in
Amsterdam is that the term "DEX" should no longer be used alone. Instead
"DEX Specification" should be used when refering to the specifications in
DEXlib. Packages of data exchanged between parties are from now on "DEX
Files". "DEX ..." is to be read as "Data Exchange ...". Anyone breaking
the rule is punished with ten pushups!
2- The term "Business Concept" is not clear.
Therefore I've introduced the term "Business Concept Specification" for
the definition stored in DEXlib. The model hopefully makes this
understandable... More explanation regarding this new term (but old
concept) is needed.
My suggestion is that this concept model (when
"completed") will be considered as a guiding document after it has been
balloted.
Does anyone have access to a proper software
modelling tool instead of powerpoint?
Let the fight begin... ;o)
Vänliga hälsningar,
Mats
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
Mats Nilsson
FMV KE LogMetod, rum C358
PLCS - Product LifeCycle Support [ISO/IEC
10303-239:2005] är en standard innehållande ett språk för kommunikation av
(underhållsrelaterad) produktinformation mellan IT-system. Mer information
finns på iNSiDAN http://insidan.fmv.se/GetPage.asp?sPageId=036003002002001
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
