Re: [regrep-cc-review] ObjectTypes for CCTS

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

In a nutshell, Diego has taken all of the CCTS object types (12 in all)
and classified them as follows:

Object Type
     |
CCTS Objects
 |   |    |
ACC ASCC BCC etc.

Farrukh and Nikola have proposed:

Object Type
     |
RegistryObject
  |	     |	
Registry  Extrinsic  
 Entry     Object    etc.
	 |   |    |
	ACC ASCC BCC etc.

Farrukh and Nikola's approach was accepted on our TC call yesterday. Is
everyone (especially Diego) comfortable with this representation of Core
Component Object Types?

Joe

Diego Ballvé wrote:
> 
> Attached is what could be the "ObjectTypes for CCTS" extension,
> using rim/rs 2.1. I think it is aligned with our talks.
> It is not under ExtrinsicObject, though it would be quite easy to
> change, if that is desirable.
> Also, 1 more level can be added to separate what is now separated
> only by comments in the xml file.
> 
> Diego
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:farrukh.najmi@sun.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 1:41 PM
> To: Chiusano Joseph
> Cc: CCRev
> Subject: [regrep-cc-review] ObjectTypes for CCTS
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> 
> ><JMC>
> >Our most recent discussions have been: A Core Component is either a
> >Basic Core Component (BCC) or Aggregate Core Component (ACC). Therefore,
> >not only are Aggregate Core Components a particular category of Core
> >Components, but Basic Core Components are as well.
> >
> >There is no special registry treatment for this requirement - it is
> >explanatory.
> ></JMC>
> >
> >
> >
> Apologies for being out of touch of late. I hope the following is not an
> off the wall suggestion or already been discussed.
> 
> Should there not be an extension to the ObjectType scheme defined for
> CCTS mapping? Such a extension would have a tree somthing like this:
> 
> 
>            |-------------BasicCoreComponent
> ExtrinsicObject---------CoreComponent----------------|
> 
> |-------------AggregateCoreComponent
> 
> Such a tree should be rooted under ExtrintrinsicObject.
> 
> BTW Nikola and I have discussed that the canonical ObjectType scheme in
> 2.5 is not right. We think it should be simplified so
> 
> -The only child of ObjectType should be RegistryObject and the current
> tree under that node
> 
> -all other non RIM types such as user defined ObjectTypes are
> descendents of ExtrinsicObject
> 
> This provides for a better model where for example a CoreComponent IS A
> ExtrinsicObject. This is more natural.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> --
> Farrukh
> 
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep-cc-review/members/leave_workgroup.php
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                                Name: SubmitObjectsRequest_CCConcepts_1.xml
>    SubmitObjectsRequest_CCConcepts_1.xml       Type: NOTEPAD File (text/xml)
>                                            Encoding: base64
>                                         Description: SubmitObjectsRequest_CCConcepts_1.xml
begin:vcard 
n:Chiusano;Joseph
tel;work:(703) 902-6923
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:www.bah.com
org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team
adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012;
version:2.1
email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com
title:Senior Consultant
fn:Joseph M. Chiusano
end:vcard