[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep-cc-review] Issue #2: "Joining" ACCs
Great. Let's see how this concept scales for the other CC entities. Below I'll list each entity and the 11179 data element terms that are attached to that entity, per the CCTS spec and our analysis: ABIE: Object Class Qualifier ACC: Object Class Qualifier Object Class ------------------------------ (separating "levels" here) BBIE: Property Term Qualifier BCC: Property Term Qualifier Property Term ------------------------------ Data Type: Representation Term Qualifier* CCT: Representation Term So following this approach, we would use the RegistryObject.name attribute to represent the following terms: ABIE: Object Class Qualifier ACC: Object Class (i.e. must choose one of the 2 possible terms) ------------------------------ (separating "levels" here) BBIE: Property Term Qualifier BCC: Property Term ------------------------------ Data Type: Representation Term Qualifier* CCT: Representation Term This raises 2 issues: (1) Using ABIE as an example, is the Object Class Qualifier (ex: "Buyer") *really* appropriate as the Dictionary Entry Name (i.e. RegistryObject.name)? According to [S44]: Dictionary Entry Name (mandatory): The official name of a Business Information Entity. Also, p.30 of CCTS spec: Step 3. Concatenate the terms to create a Naming Convention compliant Dictionary Entry Name. So, Step 3 above implies that the Dictionary Entry Name is more than just one term - it is all terms concatenated. An example on p.46 is: Dictionary Entry Name – Person. Tax. Identifier (2) Some entities will have more than one 11179 data element term - ex: ACC with "Object Class Qualifier" and "Object Class". Even if "Object Class" could justifiably be mapped to RegistryObject.name (see (1) above), it may be clearer to have a term called "Object Class" along with "Object Class Qualifier". Thoughts? Joe *this is an open issue - i.e. since CCT allows multiple Representation Terms, is a Representation Term Qualifier needed on Data Type? Monica Martin wrote: > > >ISSUE: We believe that Object Class can map to RegistryObject.name, > >since the CCTS states that Object Class "shall serve as the basis for > >the Dictionary Entry Name..." and we are mapping the Dictionary Entry > >Name to RegistryObject.name. The same idea may follow for other 11179 > >data element terms, such as Property Term and Representation Term. > > > >Thoughts? > > > > > mm1: Agree. > > >Thanks, > >Joe > > > >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 > >
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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]