Re: [plcs] Updated slides on AP239ed2

[David Price <david.price@eurostep.com>]

On Monday 09 March 2009 13:55:23 Tim Turner wrote:
> On the matter of afterthoughts,
>
> I think the real core entity for interoperbility is actually Product.
> However, I think this debate will end up in the discussion about ARM vs
> MIM/AIM & the integrated resources, which would probably not be productive.
>
> In general I would tend to agree with Peter on this issue. The criteria for
> picking which things in AP233 should go into AP239 is somewhat subjective,
> depending upon one's viewpoint.

As are all matters related to scoping a project, information model or any 
other ICT artifact.

>
> To me System & Behaviour should either be brought in together or not at
> all. Why would I want to use AP233 for Behaviour & not use System there?

I think you misunderstood my point, or how AP233 works. You can use System  
without worrying about Behaviour. Systems have structures, Requirements can 
be allocated to/satisfied by Systems, etc. So System without Behaviour is 
quite useful for PLCS,  but Behaviour on its own is not as good an idea.

Cheers,
David


-- 
Mobile +44 7788 561308 UK +44 2087473900 Skype +1 336 283 0606

Eurostep Limited. Registered in England and Wales No.03049099 Registered
Office: Cwttir Lane, St. Asaph, Denbighshire LL17 0LQ