Issues against Assigning Process Properties.

["Barker, Sean (UK)" <sean.barker@baesystems.com>]

I have raised two issues against assigning process properties, one on
general editing, and one on effectivity. I have also raised an
additional comment on Rob Bodington's issue for a template.

In addition, I do not think the discussion of classification is clear.
It seems to be allowing for multiple classifications, and although it
seems to backtrack at the end, the relation of the example
"predicited_task_duration" to the basic classifications "Qualified
property" and "Quantified property" is unclear.


<issue id="RBN-1" type="general" status="open"
category="minor_technical" by="Rob Bodington" date="05-09-21">
		<description>
There should be a template assigning_process_property
There will be an associated template: property_numerical_value in
representing_properties_numerically and property_numerical_value

</description>
<comment by="Sean Barker" date="05-11-18">
	<description>Such a template will need parameters for
property-classification, value, unit (and whether by classification or
using the Unit type), date value set and date assigned, organization
setting value, organization assinging value and  effectivity of
assignment. This would make for a rather unwieldy graphical template,
defeating the original intentions. I would suggest a restricted template
of property-classification, value, unit and effectivity. In addition, I
would suggest adding a reference to a text template, which can be
populated off-graphics. It is also not clear from the text whether
separate templates would be needed for "qualified properties" and
"quantified propoerties"</description>
</comment>
	</issue>
	<issue id="SB-1" type="general" status="open"
category="minor_technical" by="Sean barker" date="05-11-18">
		<description>
		The capability needs general copy editiing - there are a
couple of references to Resource_property instead of activity property,
and the text needs to be cognisant of the disctinction between an
activity and an activity_method, and use the preferred term Task
specification rather than task,
</description>
	</issue>

	<issue id="SB-2" type="general" status="open"
category="minor_technical" by="Sean barker" date="05-11-18">
		<description>
		The assignment of Effectivity to an activity_property
needs to be described.
		</description>
	</issue>


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.
********************************************************************