Re: [plcs] Global rules in the AP

[Per-Åke Ling <per-ake.ling@eurostep.com>]

I tried but couldn't resist replying...

Consider the following two cases:

1. I want to communicate with system/organisation, and do that by 
specifying a DEX + whatever RDL data is appropriate. The DEX enforces 
that all id_ass have organistions. Fine.

2. I am building an in-house system by implementing the PLCS model or a 
subset thereof. Since it is in-house for some specific purpose the 
organisation is implicit and can be added when exporting DEX data. 
However, if there is a global rule enforcing org, I will have to either 
implement useless stuff or intentionally break the PLCS model for my 
implementation. Not so good.

Once again: rules in capabilities/DEXes are good, even a mandated 
feature. Rules and restrictions in the PLCS model is not a good idea.

Please consider that there may be future potential users of PLCS with a 
different world-view, we should not exclude them at this point. Instead, 
let them come up with a new set of DEXes. Remember that most of the PLCS 
stuff right now is defense related, how about power plants (nuclear and 
others), fleets of trucks for transportation, shipping, and more 
esoteric stuff such as considering insurance policies as items and the 
individual insurances as individuals. They have to be maintained for 
decades, after all, and have a complex structure...

Regards,
Per-Åke

Les Debenham wrote:
> Rob,
>  
> The 2 example rules you give are exectly right. I reserve judgement on 
> the (many) unspoken global rules that may ensue.
>  
> LesD
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com]
>     *Sent:* 28 October 2004 08:38
>     *To:* plcs@lists.oasis-open.org
>     *Subject:* [plcs] Global rules in the AP
> 
>     Hi
> 
>     One of the issues in the recent debate about NSN and identification
>     was the need for global rules.
> 
>      
> 
>     AP239 had several major technical  ballot comments against it
>     complaining about the lack of global rules.
> 
>     This was one of the reasons for Germany initially voting NO.
> 
>      
> 
>     One of the ballot comments was about global rules enforcing what is
>     already documented in the mapping tables. This has been resolved.
> 
>      
> 
>     The other comment is about the lack of global rules in general.
> 
>      
> 
>     We have also had a discussion about the need to have some global
>     rules in capabilities.
> 
>      
> 
>     I agree with Per-Ake, think that we need to be very careful about
>     adding global rules as they can restrict the use of the AP.
> 
>      
> 
>     Having said that, I think that there are a few areas where we will
>     benefit from global rules in the AP as opposed to the DEXs/capabilities.
> 
>      
> 
>     E.g.
> 
>      
> 
>     Any identification assignment must have an organization assigned to it.
> 
>      
> 
>     Any product_as_individual, product_as_realised, product_as_planned,
>     part, part_version (note the model has changed!!!) must have at
>     least one identification assigned to it.
> 
>      
> 
>     Note, I am not enforcing any classification or anything, just
>     enforcing an instantiation template.
> 
>      
> 
>     What do people think to having such global rules in the AP as
>     opposed to the capabilities?
> 
>     One reason at least is keeping the bargain on changing the German No
>     vote to a Yes.
> 
>      
> 
>     Are there any other instantiation templates that we want to enforce?
> 
>      
> 
>     Regards
>     Rob
> 
>     -------------------------------------------   
>     Rob Bodington
>     Eurostep Limited
>     Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com
>     Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
>     Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030
>     Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401
> 
>      
> 
> 
> 
> *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 *
> 
> 
> 

-- 
========================================================
Per-Åke Ling            email: per-ake.ling_AT_eurostep.com
Eurostep AB             mobile: +46 709 566 490
Vasagatan 38            http://www.eurostep.com
SE-111 20 Stockholm