Hi
Tim
My inclination is
still to have a separate capability for document properties – either as a
separate capability or part of the representing_documents
capability.
We had exactly the
same discussion for process and resource properties and it was concluded that
we should split the properties capability into separate
capabilities:
assigning_process_properties
assigning_resource_properties
Agreed that document
is a subtype of product, however, if you look at the module, you will see that
subtyping has been used to indicate that the document propeorties are
different.
So if we include the
document properties in with product properties then any DEX that is just
dealing with parts will get the document properties as well. Not sure that
this is a good idea.
What does everyone
else think?
-----Original
Message-----
From: tim turner
[mailto:timturner11@bellsouth.net]
Sent: 11 August 2004 06:06
To: 'Rob
Bodington'; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: timturner11@bellsouth.net
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] document
properties issues?
1. Module ISO/TS 10303-1126:2004
(Document properties) states;
The document_property_item type is an
extension of the property_assignment_select
type. It adds the data types Document_definition
and File
to the list of alternate data types. However, this type is actually not
present in the PLCS longform as on stepmod at present, or in any previous
version I can find. The document_definition and file entity objects required
for document properties are present in the parent object
though.
Has the former now
been dropped from PLCS? Which is supposed to be used?
I presume this is/was
either an issue against the module or against the PLCS model.
2. With respect to the
ongoing discussion; if document properties are not to be included in
C076
assigning_product_properties, then can I suggest
that the introduction is misleading as it states "The
purpose of the "Assigning Properties to Products" capability is to describe
how properties are assigned to products and their subtypes". It then
gives two examples, but is clearly not definitive as to what subtypes are or
are not within scope.
-----Original
Message-----
From: tim turner
[mailto:timturner11@bellsouth.net]
Sent: 10 August 2004 18:48
To: 'Rob Bodington';
plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] document
properties
Apologies for the
late reply Rob,
From another view,
document is a type of product and as such should therefore, be handled by
this capability rather than creating or enlarging the scope of other
capabilities that are already becomming too
large.
Also document
properties do not apply to files (digital/hardcopy files) since they are not
subtypes of product & do not have am associated definition, but cannot
use the existing capability because the property_assignment_select type does
not include files. In fact it only includes one of the 18 possible types,
which means potentially another 17 capabilities to cover
all!
Documents could be
covered by adding one subtype to the existing capability
(assigned_document_property) & adding two items to the above
mentioned select type (since document_definition is not a subtype of
product_view_definition & files are independantly
defined).
I can create a new
capability or add to existing ones but it would mean repeating a large
amount of information already within
assigning_product_properties.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Rob
Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com]
Sent: 29 July 2004 03:30
To:
plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [plcs-dex] document
properties
Hi
An issue was raised against the
capability: Capability
(C076):— assigning_product_properties
that we should include document
properties in it.
Given that we decided to treat
product properties, resource properties and activity properties as
separate capabilities, and given that the document property module
subtypes the generic property model,
it seems to me that
document properties should not be part of
assigning_product_properties
Rather it should either be a
separate capability or part of representing_documents
capability.
Given that you nearly always
want to represent a documents properties whenever you represent a document
and given that document properties will never be used with anything other
than documents, I think that document properties should form part of the
representing_documents capability
Any thoughts?
Regards
Rob
-------------------------------------------
Rob
Bodington
Eurostep Limited
Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com
http://www.share-a-space.com
Email:
Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030
Mobile: +44
(0)7796 176 401