[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [plcs-dex] Classification of type and individual
The classification mechanism in PLCS covers more than "classification" as it is a generic way of attaching meaning of an object by referencing external data (of any kind). Apologies for stating the obvious... This means that the classification is multidimensional, and concievably we have one kind of classification of the parts, e.g. "ordinary" or "racing" bike. At the same time the product_as_realised could characterised as "replaceable" or "repairable", not necessarily derived from the design but a business decision for that particular instance of the product. So, I believe classifcation (characterisation) of product_as_realised is just as valid as for parts, but for different reasons. However, as with many other issues in PLCS, there must be clear restraint in how this flexibility is used, otherwise it will become unmanagebale. DEXes? Regards, Per-Åke Les Debenham wrote: > Rob, > > As a support engineer I object to what you did in your third paragraph. > Under what circumstances in our work of "Supporting" a product are we > going to allow you to modify your bicycle to a non-approved > configuration. At the first configuration audit you will be told to > de-modify until your product_as_realized (bike) conforms to its correct > configuration. You may apply a change to your configuration if that > change (Souped Up) is allowable for your realized instance of the > product design (effectivity). > > To be more precise "Souped up" is a variant of the design. You are right > it is not a classification. > > Yours configuring for ever, > Les > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] > *Sent:* 07 March 2005 13:38 > *To:* 'Gyllström Leif'; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* RE: [plcs-dex] Classification of type and individual > > > > Thinking about this a bit more ..... > > I think that this approach will get really complicated. > > > > Imagine I have a bike design classified as an "ordinary" bike. > > I then build an individual bike from this design. > > The individual bike will be classified as an "ordinary" bike. > > > > I then make a modification to my individual bike, so it is now a > "Souped up bike". > > The change was not a change to a design, but to my individual bike > so "Souped up bike" > > is not a classification of the design, but a classification of my > individual bike. > > > > > > So can we be sure that: > > a) all classifications of the typical apply equally to the > actual thing being classified. > > b) If we classify a typical will that classification apply to > all of the actual things > > > > I'm not convinced (yet) > > > > Regards > Rob > > ------------------------------------------- > Rob Bodington > Eurostep Limited > Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com > Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com > Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030 > Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401 > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* Gyllström Leif [mailto:leif.gyllstrom@aerotechtelub.se] > *Sent:* 07 March 2005 13:11 > *To:* plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* SV: [plcs-dex] Classification of type and individual > > > > Rob > > > > I would suggest that we only classify the typical due to the > implications that the other approach will have on the reference data > library. > > > > We have agreed that refdata should be regarded as specializations > (subclasses) of PLCS Entities. This would mean that an instance of > > reference data would have to be defined for both the typical and the > actual thing. Yes, OWL will allow for a class being a subclass of > > several Entity classes. But I'm convinced that this will cause > confusion and classes for typical will only appear as specializations of > > the entity representing the actual etc. > > > > I'm stongly in favor of keeping the separation of typical and > actual,and exchange both instances, and have a consistent approach > > throughout PLCS. > > > > Regards > > > > Leif > > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > *Från:* Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] > *Skickat:* den 18 februari 2005 17:27 > *Till:* plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org > *Ämne:* [plcs-dex] Classification of type and individual > > Hi > > In PLCS we make a distinction between a typical something and an > actual something. > > > > E.g > > Part and product_as_realized > > State_definition and State_observed > > > > We are also able to classify things. > > E.g. > > A Part is classified as a Bicycle > > A State_definition is classified as a Fault state. > > > > The question is, if I classify the typical things, do I need to > classify the actual thing? > > > > For example, if I classify a Part as being a bicycle, do I need > to classify the Product as realised as representing my bike, as > a being a bicycle, or do I just classify the Part? > > > > Similarly for states. > > > > If we impose a rule that you only classify the typical - not the > actual, then you will always have to exchange both the typical > and the actual. > > Which may be overkill. > > > > Any thoughts? > > Regards > Rob > > ------------------------------------------- > Rob Bodington > Eurostep Limited > Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com > Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com > Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030 > Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401 > > > > > > *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. > Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport > Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG * > > > -- ======================================================== Per-Åke Ling email: per-ake.ling_AT_eurostep.com Eurostep AB mobile: +46 709 566 490 Vasagatan 38 http://www.eurostep.com SE-111 20 Stockholm
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]