Re: Urgent Question

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

((sorry i missed th list on my response and have included LCSC on this 
as well ))

you must have missed the bit when we discussed this. the notes for the 
headings need to be revisited.  we have not changed them since the first 
edition.  I have an action item to review these headings.

i dont think the CCTS is explicit enough on this matter to say we 
contradict it.  there is definitely a link between context and 
qualification - but (as we discussed last week) this does not mean we 
must use qualifications to state the context.

How about...
<<Property Qualifier is only used for Basic and Association BIEs.  With 
BBIEs, qualification is often used when the BBIE is used in another 
context. With ASBIEs, it is the role this class(ABIE) plays within its 
association another class(ABIE).
NOTE: Before using a qualifier with a Basic BIE, you should check 
whether it is actually (a) simply adding meaning to an inadequate 
property name,(b) a different Basic BIE or (c) a possible new ABIE that 
should be associated with this ABIE (and the therefore the qualifier 
defines the role).>>

does that make it easier?


Michael Adcock wrote:

>Helpppp!
>
>The spreadsheet column heading note for 'property qualifier' says the
>following:-
>
><<Property Qualifier is only used for Aggregate BIEs.  It is the
>'context' of the relationship with another Re-usable Type.  That is, it
>is the role this class plays within its association with the 'parent'
>type. This does not apply to Basic BIEs.  If you think the Basic BIE
>needs a qualifier then it is either (a) and inadequate property name,
>(b) another Basic BIE or (c) a possible group of Basic BIEs that may be
>another Aggregate (ie Re-usable Type).>>
>
>Fundamentally if we follow the principle according to the spreadsheet
>column note, the update that adds the split between adjective and noun
>for the Property Term is easy: all Property Qualifiers for BBIEs become
>PT adjectives, while those of all ASBIES stay as PQs. 
>But where did this statement come from? To my mind, it is at odds with
>the CCTS.
>
>Checking in the CCTS, rule B24 says <<the dictionary entry name of a
>BBIE shall consist of the following components...  ...property term and
>possibly additional qualifier terms>>. Rule B25 says the same thing for
>ASBIEs. Rules B14 and B15 imply this when talking about the basis of
>definitions. Also the rule B27 adds QTs to PTs, and the example that
>follows B27 appears to me to agree with the use of property qualifier in
>the spreadsheet as is.
>
>Rule 30 is the only one that links qualifier term to context, and this
>for ABIEs.
>
>So..., is the CCTS wrong? Have our ideas changed? All views needed,
>please. I'm currently updating the spreadsheet with the split between
>Property Qualifier and Property Term adjective/noun... 
>
>
>
>Mike Adcock
>Standards & Security Unit
>APACS - Association for Payment Clearing Services
>Mercury House, Triton Court
>14 Finsbury Square
>London EC2A 1LQ
>Tel: +44 (0) 20 7711 6318
>Fax: +44 (0) 20 7711 6299
>e-mail: michael.adcock@apacs.org.uk
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>The opinions expressed are those of the individual and not the company.
>  Internet communications are not secure and therefore APACS does not  
>     accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.
>  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
>employee responsible for delivering this communication to the intended
>recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or
>   copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
>          telephone to arrange for its return.  Thank you.
>**********************************************************************
>
>  
>

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
phone: +618 93352228  
postal: po box 1289   fremantle    western australia 6160