The following issue against capability
representing_process_property is now closed, since I got no further information
regarding the requirements. I do not understand how effectivities would apply
to a property (i.e. the _named_ property, not the property value, which is not
allowed in PLCS).
Issue: SB-2 by
Sean barker (05-11-18) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open
The assignment of Effectivity to an activity_property
needs to be described.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 2006-06-05)
Is this needed more than a description of how to assign a condition, an
approval, an identification, a document, a language_indication, a justification
or a task_method (just to mention a few) to an activity_property? Or shouldn't
this be described in a capability for how to assign effectivities?
I think we might have a philosophical issue here: If something is not described
in the capability, but the schema allows it, is it then not allowed (or
deprecated) in the OASIS guidelines? Is it 'illegal'? Especially now with the
templates, I can sense an unspoken conception that nothing except what's in the
templates (or capabilities) is allowed. I would like this to be true, since life
would be easier then, but I fear that we have forgotten to mention a lot of
'common sense' assignments to many entities in all of the capabilities in that
case (just look at the list at the beginning of this paragraph!). Maybe we need
to decide what 'conformance' to the OASIS PLCS DEXs or Capabilities really
mean? And then possibly add all those assignments to all capabilities?
Or maybe I have just misunderstood this issue altogether...?
Comment: (Peter Bergström 2006-06-21)
The PLCS schema allows effectivity to be assigned to a property, not a value.
Please provide some examples that show the business requirements for assigning
an effectivity to a property.
Peter Bergström