Alternative representation of Parts List

[Gyllström Leif <leif.gyllstrom@aerotechtelub.se>]

Hi

At the Lillehammer meeting we had a lot of discussions regarding Parts List, and whether it
should be a separate DEX, or a capability, or .... However, I think we concluded on that.

However, I still think there is a practical issue that we have to resolve and that is HOW
a Parts List should be represented in a data exchange based the PLCS data model. 
My concern does not just adress the Parts List issue, but practically any other exchange
of documented results such as a FMECA analysis report, a Maintenance plan etc etc.

In the attached document I've provided four different approaches on HOW a documented
result (e.g. Parts List) could be represented in a data exchange. (And there might be more)

I think we have to conclude on one approach which will be generic enough to cater
for any type of documented result.

Any thoughts ?? 

It might even be a combination of the four approached that would be the best solution
such as a combination of #1 and #4.

Regrads

Leif Gyllström


 <<Four alternatives for Part List representation.doc>>

Four alternatives for Part List representation.doc