RE: [regrep-cc-review] CCTS Requirement [S7] - p.76

[Diego Ballvé <diego.ballve@republica.fi>]

> Not quite. An ACC has CCProperty which contain Property Terms for its
> (the ACC's) contained ASCCs/BCCs. This means that a CC has no property
> term until it gets used (contained) by an ACC. Confusing..

<JMC>
Hmmm...I would be interested to know why you interpret the CCTS spec
this way. My interpretation has always been that Core Components are to
be stored as entities with their specified attributes, which include
PropertyTerm. In other words, a registry submitter should be allowed to
submit a Core Component as a RegistryObject in its own right, without
that Core Component being "contained" by an Aggregate Core Component.
This will allow registry submitters to submit all their Core Components
in advance of creating their Aggregate Core Components if they wish to.
</JMC>

I totally agree with you here. It would be stupid if you couldn't first
define basic parts, then use them for something more complex.

<JMC>
Please point me to the requirement in the CCTS spec that states that
Core Component attributes must not be populated until the Core Component
is contained by an Aggregate Core Component. I may have missed it.
</JMC>

S8-S10: especially on page 77, 1st paragraph: (Property Term) shall
serve as basis for Dictionary Entry Name of the Basic or Association
Core Component (note: no ACC) that represents this CC Property.

Based on that, first you have to define a CC Property, Association
or Basic, and then set the Dictionary Entry Name. Now combine S10
with S8 and you should store the CC Property with the Aggregate CC,
not with the Association/Basic CC. What comes first, the egg or the
chicken?? :)

Diego