Templates for task

["Barker, Sean (UK)" <Sean.Barker@baesystems.com>]

Having gone through a first iteration of representing_task_simple with Leif, and tried to see what can be done in the constraints of the template structure, I am increasing convinced that templates are completely and utterly the wrong approach for documenting tasks and how to instantiate them.

Essentially, a task template would instantiate so little as to be virtually meaningless, and 90% of the work for even a simple task is concerned with non-atomic characterization (i.e. where a single aspect of the problem is described by two or more separate characterizations), which cannot be represented in the current template schemas. 

I propose therefore to revert to the original approach of defining the use of task through the capabilities.

This is not to say that there is no use for templates, but they are essentially putting a single level object model overlay on the data model, where parameters are limited to simple types, and characterizations are additive and independent. In some uses, such as identification_assignment, they are very useful. However, for uses beyond that, we would be better off inventing an OO version of EXPRESS, with interfaces and hierarchical composition.

Sean Barker
0117 302 8184

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************