RE: [plcs-dex] Assigning identifiers with no organization

[Tim King <tmk@lsc.co.uk>]

Title: RE: [plcs-dex] Assigning identifiers with no organization

Dear Sean,

I think you are right that part number has been the general focus.  But I think we have also discussed this as a general principle.  Unless I am being stupid (quite possible!), to be clear, I think you more explicitly mean "The data model allows versions to have multiple version numbers, if we use Identification_assignment (rather than the .id attributes on entities)" but I am afraid I can not answer your question about happening in practice from personal experience.  However, even if multiplicity is not possible, I think there is still a potential business requirement that we should be explicit about the assigning organization.

Cheers,
Tim.

________________________________

From: Barker, Sean (UK) [mailto:sean.barker@baesystems.com]
Sent: 07 November 2005 10:02
To: Tim King; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Assigning identifiers with no organization

Tim,
 
1) Items have multiple identifiers, such as original manufacturer number and customer stock number
2) The data model allows versions to have multiple version numbers - does this ever happen in practice?
3) If it does not happen, do we therefore need an organization against the version number?
 
My memory of the discussion was that it centred on part numbers, where an organization is definitely needed, rather than on version numbers.

 
Sean Barker
0117 302 8184
 

________________________________

From: Tim King [mailto:tmk@lsc.co.uk]
Sent: 07 November 2005 08:18
To: Barker, Sean (UK); 'plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Assigning identifiers with no organization

*** WARNING ***

This mail has originated outside your organization,
either from an external partner or the Global Internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
       

Apologies if I have misunderstood but I am uncomfortable with this.  I thought PLCS had firmly established the principle of requiring the assigning organization in all situations.  If truly "the item being versioned provides the context information" then surely this would be the purpose of the ".id" attribute on Product_version?  Unless you are trying to say that multiple identifiers of version are possible in the context of the item and the identification assignment requires further context specification through classification (I can not think of a real example, I was going to suggest "design" versus "manufacturing" but that seems to be another example of different organizational contexts).

Cheers,
Tim.

-----Original Message-----
From: Barker, Sean (UK) [mailto:sean.barker@baesystems.com]
Sent: 05 November 2005 08:46
To: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [plcs-dex] Assigning identifiers with no organization

In assigning a version number, it is normally assumed that the item being versioned provides the context information (i.e. that the version number is effectively the second part of a compound key, the first part of which is the item number). Assigning version numbers should therefore use the template for assigning an identifier without an organization, and logically this template should be migrated to the assigning identifiers capability, rather than be in the assigning organization capability. Comments?

Additional Observations

Question to Business users: I have made the assumption that where multiple identifiers are applied to the same item, these do not independently define version numbers. Is this true?

Sean Barker
0117 302 8184

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.

You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************

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

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