Tracker: PLCS Ref. data  :—Issues for CCB decision

[Index] [Process] [All issues] [In work issues]

Export date: 2012-10-01 09:41:06

Row Id Category Summary Details Priority Status Resolution Release Submitter Assignee Closer
1 3572714 the set of owl classes for id codes should be complete Every SysML block that can be assigned an identifier should have a corresponding owl class that is a sub-class of "Identifier" and that can be used to classify the relevant Identifier. For example InformationUsageRight has an attribute called "id" which allows for the assignment of one or many Identifiers. Each Identifier can in turn be assigned a Classification that may be an Owl class (or some other type of class). If an Owl class is to be used, it should exist in the OWL plcs-rdl-en.owl file under the Identifier class. In this case the relevant name for the class would be "Information_usage_right_identification_code" (or similar - the exact naming convention is something that requires a separate discussion). 5 Open Remind mikeward nobody nobody
2 3572716 owl classes for id codes should be consistently named Every SysML block that can be assigned an identifier should have a corresponding owl class that is a sub-class of "Identifier" and that can be used to classify the relevant Identifier and the name of that class should be derived directly from the name of the original block. For example GlobalLocationRepresentation has an attribute called "id" (inherited from LocationRepresentation) which allows for the assignment of one or many Identifiers. Each Identifier can in turn be assigned a Classification that may be an Owl class (or some other type of class). If an Owl class is to be used, it should be called "Global_location_representation_identification_code" (or similar - the "identification_code" suffix is something that requires a separate discussion). It is currently called "Geographic_location_identification_code" - something that cannot be reliably inferred from the relevant block. 5 Open Remind mikeward nobody nobody
3 3572722 owl classes for id codes should be consistently structured Every SysML block that can be assigned an identifier should have a corresponding owl class that is a sub-class of "Identifier" and that owl class should appear in a hierarchy that is structured just like the main class tree. For example the owl class "ActivityMethod" has (inter alia) a sub-class called "TaskElement" and "TaskElement" has (inter alia) sub-classes called "EndTask" and "ExitLoop": Activity_method Task_element End_task Exit_loop All the corresponding SysML blcoks can be assigned identifiers which can in turn be assigned a Classification that may be an Owl class (or some other type of class). The relevant Owl classes should be as follows: Identifier Activity_method_identification_code Task_element_identification_code End_task_identification_code Exit_loop_identification_code This hierarchy reflects that the set of exit loop ids is a subset of the set of task element ids which is (in turn) a subset of the set of activity method ids and also provides a reliable way to infer the route to a particular owl id class in the tree. (The "identification_code" suffix is something that requires a separate discussion) It can be argued that other groupings are required - eg the set of owl id classes that include the word "version" (not all of which will occur under "Product_version_identification code") but if this is felt necessary, an additional class called "Version_identification_classes" (or similar) should be created and all the relevant owl classes should be included in that class IN ADDITION to their inclusion in the "correct parent class in the owl tree. Such additional groupings would provide an additional navigation mechanism, but at the expense of additional complexity. 5 Open Remind mikeward nobody nobody
4 3572726 owl identifier classes should have a different suffix Every SysML block that can be assigned an identifier should have a corresponding owl class that is a sub-class of "Identifier" and that can be used to classify the relevant Identifier and the name of that class should be derived directly from the name of the original block plus the suffix "_identifier" instead of "_identification_code". For example "Address_identification_code" should be renamed "Address_ identifier". This is a minor issue, but any owl classes that occur below the Identifier class represent subclasses or subsets of identifier. In the past (when names were grouped under Identifier) we needed to distinguish between a name and an id code and had two extra intermediate classes for this purpose. Now these (and the corresponding distinction) have gone, it would make much mores sense to stick to a consistent class naming convention and use the suffix "_identifier" for all SysML block derived id classes ("NSN_code"s etc that hang below the main set of owl id classes do not have to obey any kind of consistent convention here and can stay as they are). 5 Open Remind mikeward nobody nobody