RE: [plcs-dex] RE: Capability property value ranges

Hi Tim,

Now I have looked at your templates, and the way you use them, and I have a few questions:

In your template representing_numerical_value_with_unit you have included the Property_value_representation entity, but as far as I understand from Cap Representing_location you are not using it. The inclusion appears to have been a copy-paste mistake. If so, I think I understand your requirements (i.e. everything but Property_value_representation.
[Tim Turner Replies:] Correct - on on the 1st point, less so on the second! I found template representing_numerical_value_with_unit unecessary after reviewing the requirements again, but left it in case it was useful for others.

The reason for including the Property_value_representation is that for complex subtypes of Value_with_unit e.g. Numerical_value_with_unit there is a rule which states that it must be referenced by an instance of representation (as a .item if I remember). The point is that you cannot just instantiate the NIWU by itself due to the rule inherited by Measure_item.

For locations, it is only required to use Value_with_unit, which then removes the requirement for a separate representation (it is not a subtype of Measure_item). The representation, however, is useful for associating the values with a product, property or process (for which there are the relevant hooks in those parts of the model) - however, Location is (unfortunately) none of the above.

I can see two resolutions here:

1) I change the Representing_numerical_value in cap Representing_properties_numerically to include a reference parameter ^item, in which case you would get exactly what you have now, or

2) I edit your representing_numerical_value_with_unit by deleting the Property_value_representation entity, and use that in Representing_numerical_value. It would then have a reference parameter ^item, and it would be located in Cap Representing_value_with_unit.
[Tim Turner Replies:] did try to use C079 to begin with but realized that the NIWU was allowed as a ref parameter, so began with my own version to enable the assignment to a location. I also deleted the prop_val_rep & context because I could see no use in Location for it - until I discovered the rule during validation. Hence the state of the template representing_numerical_value_with_unit in rep.locns cap.

The first choice is the easiest for me, but kind of cludgy, so I think I go for the second choice.
[Tim Turner Replies:] I think your I think we will need both a template for representing_value_with_unit where the value_with_unit is referenceable and a template for representing_properties_numerically. I would suggest to make the numerical_value_with_unit entity instance referenceable as well so that other representations can re-use them when necessary.

So I would keep your existing Representing_numerical_value in C079, but make the NVWU referenceable. I also recommend adding the template for Value_with_unit to C00, as is.

I'm however not sure that I will include the representing_value_with_unit template in Cap Representing_value_with_unit. To me, I can't see the difference between a value with unit and a numerical value with unit, and it seem to me that it will only confuse issues ('which one is applicable where?'). Can you or someone else enlighten me regarding their difference?
[Tim Turner Replies:] See my points above. I think the value with unit template is needed for those items which are not product, processes or properties, but which need a value with unit.

Also, bear in mind that there is also the document_property_representation which will need to re-use some of these templates as this is not covered.

Comments?

Cheers,

Peter

From: Tim Turner [mailto:tjt@lsc.co.uk]
Sent: den 18 maj 2006 17:01
To: 'Hendrix, Thomas E'; 'peter.bergstrom@eurostep.com'
Cc: 'plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] RE: Capability property value ranges

Hi Peter,

For your info, I have just managed to get my sourcefoge account operational again & have uploaded some work from last week during the outage.

Inside representing_location, you will see that there are 7 templates - 2 of which are additional templates that were done during development of this capability. These are; representing_value_with_unit (- the previous one in C00 - version 1.6 had many errors) & representing_numerical_value_with_unit. The first should be moved to the appropriate place while the second was found not to be necessary - but I have left it since it works & may serve a purpose sometime.

Kind regards,
Tim

NB - all work without error in GI

-----Original Message-----
From: Hendrix, Thomas E [mailto:thomas.e.hendrix@boeing.com]
Sent: 18 May 2006 10:30
To: peter.bergstrom@eurostep.com
Cc: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [plcs-dex] RE: Capability property value ranges

Peter,
Go for it.

Regards,

Tom

Thomas E. Hendrix
Phone: 206-544-5276
thomas.e.hendrix@boeing.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Bergström [mailto:peter.bergstrom@eurostep.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:39 AM
To: Hendrix, Thomas E
Cc: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Capability property value ranges

Tom,

I'm editing the property capabilities in DEXlib now, and need three templates in cap representing_property_value_ranges, one for range, one for limit and one for value with tolerance.

Can I take over the editorship temporarily, or will you do it?

Peter Bergström
Eurostep AB

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

plcs-dex message