RE: [plcs] Updated slides on AP239ed2

["Tim Turner" <TJT@lsc.co.uk>]

>> 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
>

Right, and that's why I suggest that System & Behaviour be brought in together. I think the argument works in both directions, but irrespective of that, there is an LCIA requirement for using Behaviour which would be useful to tie up with the suggested use of System. 

Since this relationship is already captured by the relevant module, and is self-contained (i.e. it doesn't pull anything else into 239 that isn't already there - as far as I can see), I would urge that this be brought in.

Regards,
Tim

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 Ltd. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, 
Plymouth, PL1 4SG, having a place of business at Lincoln House, Wellington Crescent, Fradley Park, Lichfield, Staffordshire WS13 8RZ and at Catherine House, 
40a St Thomas Street, Weymouth, Dorset DT4 8EH. VAT number: GB 655 1330 55. 

Please consider whether it is necessary to print this e-mail