Re: [ciq] xPRL Draft Data Model

[john.glaubitz@vertexinc.com]

Hi Ram,

At least for conversation sake, I have a different model to suggest and a
few questions to go along with it.

- In the examples you provided for a PartyGroup, it seems to me that the
Group has it's own identity and therefore could be simply another type of
party.  This party could have PartyRelationships with the other Parties
that are it's members thereby taking advantage of what we are trying to
model here (including roles, start and end dates, etc.).

- I'm not sure I see how you're using Audit information here.  If we want
to go down the road of including this level of metadata around data
changes, why would we limit it to a Relationship?  Wouldn't this be just as
important to the business as a Party Name change or Address change?  Not
that I'm suggesting adding a similar class to all these areas.

- For the complex structure you suggest below such as an org chart, I
believe a very deep hierarchy can be built rather simply.  If I were to
create a data model for this, I may have done it as a classic Bill of
Materials structure which would have multiple associations from Party to
Relationship rather than having a self-referencing composition association
on the Relationship.  For an XML model, I would see this as an extension of
a Party such that for a given Party, all the Relationships needed for that
Party could be associated.  Each Relationship is associated to the
corresponding Party in the Relationship.  The Related Party, being just
another Party type, would have it's associated relationships etc., etc.

Thanks,

John


(See attached file: xPRL v3.0 Alternate.JPG)


                                                                           
             Ram Kumar                                                     
             <ram.kumar@oasis-                                             
             open.org>                                                  To 
                                       "David RR Webber (XML)"             
             07/16/2007 04:58          <david@drrw.info>                   
             AM                                                         cc 
                                       "liz.kolster@ssc.govt.nz"           
                                       <liz.kolster@ssc.govt.nz>,          
             Please respond to         ciq@lists.oasis-open.org            
             ram.kumar@oasis-o                                     Subject 
                  pen.org              Re: [ciq] xPRL Draft Data Model     
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




David,

Thanks for your comments.
The whole purpose of xPRL is to define the relationships between parties.
It does not go to define the policies, access credentials, or privacy as
we have clearly stated that this is outside the goal of CIQ.
If we try to get into this area, we are opening all sorts of issues.
The purpose of "audit" is to track the relationship status (e.g. when
was the contact established last - this is
very important for business purpose). The repetition has to occur
particularly, if you want to define complex
relationships such as representing an entire organisation structure.
e.g. A had a relationship with B, B has a relationship
with C, C has a relationship with D and E, etc.

All the diagram says is that a party or a group of parties (Primary
Party/Party Group)and their relationships
with party(ies) or group of party(ies) (Secondary Party/Party Group).

Regards,

Ram

David RR Webber (XML) wrote:
> Ram,
>
> This seems oddly repetitive.  Also not sure what the purpose of
> "audit" part is?
>
> Just seems the diagram is telling you nothing like what your text is
> hinting at!?!
>
> Also - surely the notion of circles and groups comes in hugely here.
> Therefore there is really TWO models - one for the circle/group notion
> including privacy and access policies, and access logging - and then
> person / participant.
>
> Then a third diagram that shows how the two parts interact - and how
> the participants can manage and control access themselves - inspect
> access tracking - restrict and invite as needed.
>
> I'm not getting any of this from the one diagram you have here!
>
> Thanks, DW
>
> "The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)
>
>
>     -------- Original Message --------
>     Subject: [ciq] xPRL Draft Data Model
>     From: "Ram Kumar" <kumar.sydney@gmail.com>
>     Date: Sat, July 14, 2007 3:17 am
>     To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org
>     Cc: "liz.kolster@ssc.govt.nz" <liz.kolster@ssc.govt.nz>
>
>     TC Members,
>
>     Please find enclosed a draft data model of extensible Party
>     Relationships Language (xPRL) v3.0.
>     PartyGroup refers to more than one party or organisation as a
>     group (e.g. football team, a group
>     of organisations together bidding for a project, family) and the
>     party group could be a legal or a
>     non legal entity for organisation group.
>
>     xPRL covers only the following types of relationships:
>
>     - Person(s)  to Person(s) relationship(s)
>     - Organisation(s) to Organisation(s) relationship(s), and
>     - Person(s) to Organisation(s) relationships and vice versa,
>
>     Let me know your views.
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Ram
>

--
Ram Kumar
Manager - Technical Committee Development
OASIS
Post Office Box 455
Billerica,MA 0821
USA
+61 412 758 025 (Direct)
+ 1 978 667 5115 (OASIS HQ)
+ 1 978 667 5114 (Fax)
ram.kumar@oasis-open.org
http://www.oasis-open.org
"Advancing e-Business Standards Since 1993"

xPRL v3.0 Alternate.JPG