[Index] [Process] [CCB issues] [In work issues] [Open NoRes issues]
Export date: 2012-10-12 06:02:53
Row | Id | Category | Summary | Details | Priority | Status | Resolution | Release | Submitter | Assignee | Closer |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 3526623![]() |
Update OWL PLCS PSM defnitions to be terminological sound | All PSM OWL classes need to be udpated to have the correct annotation properties, have no model specific details in them (e.g reference to attributes etc.) and have terminologically correct definition | 5 | Open | None | robbod | nobody | nobody | ||
2 | 3527517![]() |
Create a separate OWL file for terminology | Create a separate OWL file for terminology The URL should be: http://docs.oasis-open.org/plcs/plcs-terms-en.owl | 5 | Open | None | robbod | nobody | nobody | ||
3 | 3566989![]() |
owl classes included in templates made ready for review | owl classes included in templates made ready for review | 5 | Open | Accepted | mikeward | mikeward | nobody | ||
4 | 3568406![]() |
RD: Multiple language definition | It should be possible to manage multiple languages. As an example create Swedish reference data for the PLCS PSM and RDL | 5 | Open | Accepted | robbod | robbod | nobody | ||
5 | 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 | Accepted | mikeward | mikeward | nobody | ||
6 | 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 | ||
7 | 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 | ||
8 | 3574152![]() |
quality of content | PLCS-PSM should be translated into Swedish | All PLCS-PSM classes that has a least reached status 'passed_review' should be translated. Specify which classes has been modified between each check-in in the comment field. | 7 | Open | None | matsn | matsn | nobody | |
9 | 3576007![]() |
quality of content | corrrect and complete owl classes under StateDefinition | The hierarchy of owl classes under StateDefinition needs to be completed for the set of blocks to which a StateDefinition can be assigned: Activity, File< Project etc and the annotations for those classes need correcting or (in most cases) creating | 5 | Open | Accepted | mikeward | mikeward | nobody | |
10 | 3576418![]() |
quality of content | corrrect and complete owl classes under DateTimeAssignment | the current hierarchy of owl rdl classes under the DateTimeAssignment classes is partially constructed according to a date-role facet: planed/actual, start/end ect, but also includes classes based (at least partially) on the target of the assignment: Date_actual_approval, Work_order_issue_date etc. If assignment target classes are to be created then we should require a complete set: Date_assignment_to_activity [....] Date_assignment_to_product Date_assignment_to_part Date_assignment_to_product_concept [....] Date_assignment_to_project and so on Each class would have to be further specialized as Planned_start_date_assigned_to_activity, Actual_end_date_assigned_to_activity, Planned_end_date_assigned_to_activity [....] Planned_start_date_assigned_to_project and so on This would result in a non-trivial number of RDL classes which would be difficult to navigate. Multiple classification using multiple facets such as Activity/Project, Planned/Actual, Start/End would avoid this problem, but that approach has been rejected - partly because of the implications for file-size. Given these considerations, the only realistic coherent solution is to have a single tree along these lines: DateTimeAssignment Actual_date_assignment Actual_start_date_assignment Actual_end_date_assignment [....] Planned_date_assignment Planned_start_date_assignment Planned_end_date_assignment etc (though we could re-use the existing names for these classes) and to delete all the classes based on assignment targets, specifically: Date_actual_approval, Date_actual_certification, Date_actual_observation, Date_message_data_frozen, Date_message_sent, Work_order_issue_date, Work_request_issue_date, Work_order_required_completion_date. This would imply the creation of some additional general classes such as: Actual_completion_date_assignment, Planned_sending_date_assignment etc The documentation for such classes should be used to indicated what the relevant (or typical) assignment targets are: Thus a start_date might apply to an activity or a project but not to a part. A sending date might apply to a message but not to a risk-event - and so on | 5 | Open | Remind | mikeward | nobody | nobody | |
1 | 3529668![]() |
Incorrect OWL class URI | The IRIs for refdata are not be used correctly. They are including the language designator. This is incorrect http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/plcs/oasis-rdl-en#Product_life_cycle_support It should be http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/plcs/oasis-rdl#Product_life_cycle_support This needs to be changed EVERYWHERE that the URI is incorrect. | 9 | Closed | Fixed | robbod | robbod | robbod | ||
2 | 3533251![]() |
Align plcs-en.owl with plcs model | Ensure that the OWL classes reflects the PLCS PSM Blocks. | 5 | Closed | Fixed | robbod | robbod | robbod | ||
3 | 3563236![]() |
various corrections to rdl and terms | Various corrections to rdl and terms resulting from recent changes to PSM and error report generated Wed 2012-08-29 06:56 by RBN | 5 | Closed | Fixed | mikeward | mikeward | robbod | ||
4 | 3564943![]() |
2012-08-30 review comments | Address 2012-08-30 review comments and update status of relevant elements to \"passed_review\" | 5 | Closed | Fixed | mikeward | mikeward | mikeward | ||
5 | 3565248![]() |
RD: Baseline | Add baseline | 5 | Closed | Fixed | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
6 | 3565253![]() |
RD: Activity_subject | Add Activity subject | 5 | Closed | Fixed | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
7 | 3565300![]() |
qualification added to terms | qualification added to terms | 5 | Closed | Fixed | mikeward | mikeward | mikeward | ||
8 | 3566982![]() |
urls need correcting | ns urls need correcting | 5 | Closed | Fixed | mikeward | mikeward | mikeward | ||
9 | 3495308![]() |
Add Property_value_assignment_history_relationship | Add Property_value_assignment_history_relationship as am OWL class that is a subclass of PropertyValueAssignmentRelationship A Property_value_assignment_history_relationship is a PropertyValueAssignmentRelationship that represents a historical relationship between two PropertyValueAssignments. The values being assigned by the PropertyValueAssignments are assigned to the same object and have changed over time. </rdfs:comment> | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | robbod | robbod | ||
10 | 3495309![]() |
Add Property_value_derivation_relationship | Add Property_value_derivation_relationship as a subclass of PropertyValueRelationship A Property_value_derivation_relationship is a PropertyValueRelationship that represents a relationship between two PropertyValues where one PropertyValue is derived from the other. | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | robbod | robbod | ||
11 | 3526565![]() |
plcs.owl / plcs-en.owl duplicating annotations | The annotation properties are duplicated in plcs.owl / plcs-en.owl. The following properties shoul be used: plcs.owl Classes should have: <owl:Class rdf:about=""> <owl:versionInfo rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">1</owl:versionInfo> <dc:source rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">ISO 10303-239ed2 transformed to AP239AP233 PSM</dc:source> plcs-en.owl Classes should have: <skos:prefLabel xml:lang="en">State cause effect</skos:prefLabel> <dc:creator rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">last person who edited the class definition</dc:creator> <dc:contributor/> <dc:date>2012-01-26</dc:date> <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en"> <skos:example/> | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
12 | 3526566![]() |
SKOS reference incorrect | The reference to skos in plcs.owl and other owl files is: http://www.w3.org/2004/skos/core# which does not resolve to a valid page It should be http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core# e.g. <!ENTITY skos "http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#" > xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#" Other ref data files will probably have to be corrected | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
13 | 3527582![]() |
Combine plcs.owl and plcs-en.owl | There is no reason why the plcs information model ref data is split into plcs.owl and plcs-en.owl They should be combined | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
14 | 3528993![]() |
Move plcs-en.owl to refdata | A number of the hyperlinks do not work when displaying the plcs ref data. This is caused by an assumption in the XSLT that ALL teh ref data will be in refdata folders. E.g. data/contexts/OASIS/refdata The plcs ref data should be moved to data/PLCS/psm_model/refdata | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | robbod | robbod | ||
15 | 3534825![]() |
ProperyValue Property Definitions | PropertyValue and its subtypes is used as a property in a number of place in the PLCS model. E.g ProperyValue: RequirementViewDefinition.definitionalRepresentations RiskPerception.riskLevel ShapeDependentPropertyRepresentation.propertyRepresentation ValueWithUnit: AssemblyComponentRelationship.quantity GeometricCoordinateSpace.accuracies GlobalLocationRepresentation.altitude GlobalLocationRepresentation.latitude GlobalLocationRepresentation.longitude LotEffectivity.lotSize MakeFromRelationship.quantity ManagedResource.quantity RegionalCoordinate.coordinateValue RequiredResource.requiredQuantity ResourceAsRealized.quantity ResourceEvent.quantity ResourceGroupRelationship.quantity WorkOutput.quantity Each attribute is in effect a property, so a set of OWL Objects should be created for the property definition and the model documentation updated. "Requirement_definition" used by: RequirementViewDefinition.definitionalRepresentations "Quantity" used by: LotEffectivity.lotSize MakeFromRelationship.quantity ManagedResource.quantity RequiredResource.requiredQuantity ResourceAsRealized.quantity ResourceEvent.quantity ResourceGroupRelationship.quantity WorkOutput.quantity The Quanity can have a | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
16 | 3534892![]() |
ExternalTypeQualifier | There should be a number of qualifiers. in particular: maximum_value minimum_value | 5 | Closed | None | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
17 | 3565217![]() |
Baseline PLCS OASIS ref data | Ensure that 1) all the annotations properties are added 2) that all the classes are correctly classes not individuals | 5 | Closed | Duplicate | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
18 | 3565246![]() |
RD: Identification_codes | Make sure that all the subclasses of Identification_code are correct. I.e. that there is a corresponding PSM block that can be identified. | 5 | Closed | Duplicate | robbod | nobody | robbod | ||
19 | 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 | Closed | Rejected | mikeward | nobody | robbod | ||
20 | 3565434![]() |
FMV prioritized RD made ready_for_review | FMV prioritized RD made ready_for_review | 5 | Closed | Works For Me | mikeward | mikeward | mikeward |