Capability (C010):— assigning_reference_data Date: 2007/06/22 12:22:09
Revision: 1.23
CoverContentsIntro.Overview Info. modelTemplatesCapabilities.Issues

Issue raised against: assigning_reference_data

GENERAL issues

Open issue Issue: GYL-9 by Rob Bodington (07-04-13) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

The capability should make it clear that assigning_code data can be used instead of assigning_reference data

Open issue Issue: GYL-8 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-10-20) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

The assigning PLCS superclass characterization section refers to a leaf class in the PLCS standard reference data library. Does this mean that extensions allway has to based on leaf classes ?
Comment: (Peter Bergström 2007-05-04)
If a leaf class can also be one of the Express entities, I would say yes (however, that might have to be made clear in the text here). All reference data must always a subclass of something in the AP239 schema.

Open issue Issue: RBN-7 by Rob Bodington (05-10-25) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

There are currently three templates specifying different ways of assigning reference data: assigning_business_specific_reference_data assigning_reference_data assigning_code Assigning_reference_data is used by default in most templates that need reference data e.g. assigning_organization. However, in different situations, each of the three approaches to assigning reference data is appropriate. This then raises the question as to how to represent this within a template such as assigning_organization. Option 1) We could have three templates for assigning_organization. One for each use of reference data. This would not really address the problem as any template using assigning_organization has the same problem. Option 2) We could exclude the assigning_reference_data from templates. This has a disadvantage in that the reference data may be inconsistently applied or not applied. Option 3) Always use assigning_reference_data in other templates. Document the fact that when assigning_reference_data is used either assigning_business_specific_reference_data, or assigning_codes could be used instead. In fact, it could be argued, that only assigning_business_specific_reference_data or assigning_codes should be used. As both have the same template arguments, we avoid any problems. Perhaps we need a special parameter set for class information that indicates whether the class is standard, business or a code. Furthermore, the instantiation patterns of assigning_business_specific_reference_data and assigning_codes are different, one uses classification_assignment to relate two classes, the other uses Subset - they should use the same.

Open issue Issue: PBM-3 by Peter Bergström (2007-01-31) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

In order to process OWL correctly, the reference data library that is the most specialized rdl must be identified as the context ontology. The context ontology must include all other rdl's in an exchange file. This should be achieved by classifying the most specialized External_data_library as the "Context_ontology".



Figure 1 —  Possible solution

Figure 1 —  Possible solution

This template should describe how to achieve this, both in text and using an instance example. An OWL class "Context_ontology" has to be created. Possibly, a specific template has to be developed for this.

Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 07-04-23)
This issue has been moved from the template 'assigning_reference_data', since the context ontology should only be refered to once within a message. However, the usage of context ontology should also be mentioned within the assigning_reference_data capability.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 2007-05-04)
Any External_class_library entity representing a specific, identified RDL should only be instantiated once in a data set (although there is currently no uniqueness constraint in the template to that effect, which I think is incorrect, see issue PBM-3 for template assigning_reference_data). That fact makes this capability just the correct place to do it. What would be a better place?

Open issue Issue: PBM-4 by Peter Bergström (2007-05-04) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open

The description of how to use attributes id and description of entity External_class_library in the capability does not harmonize with what is done in template "assigning_reference_data". The capability allows too much flexibility here in my opinion, allowing the description attribute to be used (although in most other capabilities an assigning_descriptor is used instead), and allowing an arbitrary document identification as the source of external reference data in attribute id (which does not go well with the decision to use OWL for reference data). The capability should restrict external class libraries to be only digital libraries structured in accordance with the DEXlib rules for reference data (maybe not necessarily an OWL-file, but certainly digital, at least). It should also recommend, if not exclude all others, that the RDL is identified using a URN, which is what we use for OASIS reference data libraries.
Similarly, I think the description of the possible use of the id attribute of entity External_class should be deleted, and the attribute should always be set to /IGNORE instead. (However, I would personally have preferred to use the ID attribute to identify the class, since the name of the class is language dependent, but I guess that is too late to change now... ;-) The possibility of finding the reference data class in either of these two attributes is confusing to an implementor, and we should avoid that.

GENERAL issues

Closed issue Issue: TJT-1 by Tim Turner (05-04-11) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Version 1.8 of this capability contains material developed for the example Dex and introduces tables of contraints, rules and sections which will be moved to the business DEXs area. This capability needs to be reset to version 1.6 to effect this.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-13)
Version 1.9 is reset to the content of version 1.6

Closed issue Issue: GYL-1 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-06-13) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The section Business DEX overview should be renamed to Business overview.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-13)
Done

Closed issue Issue: GYL-2 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-06-13) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Introduce the template section into the capability
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-23)
Done

Closed issue Issue: GYL-3 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-06-13) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Express-G like diagram is missing in the Information Model Overview
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-23)
Done

Closed issue Issue: GYL-4 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-06-13) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Delete the usage of Attribute classification
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-10-06)
Removed the usage of Attribute classification as the means of controlling standard values. Added a section under Additional usage guidance.

Closed issue Issue: GYL-5 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-06-13) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Change model reviewer to Core_team
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-10-06)
Done

Closed issue Issue: GYL-6 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-10-06) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Complete the section on related standards.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-10-06)
Added information about 15926 and PartsLib.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-1 by Rob Bodington (04-08-18) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The ID attribute of external class should hold the URN of the class in the external library.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-23)
Added in both textual description and in the template.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-2 by Rob Bodington (04-09-03) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Figure 1 is too small to read
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-23)
All figures replaced

Closed issue Issue: RBN-3 by Rob Bodington (04-11-24) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The capability should describe how one explicitly represents the fact that something have NOT been classified where a classification is expected. The reason being that sending system was not able to provide a sensible class. E.g. if the life_cycle_stage of a view defnition is not known. The approach is specify the name attribute on external_class as being /NULL.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-23)
Added section under Additional usage guidance. However, recommendation is to use PLCS standard class 'Unknown'

Closed issue Issue: RBN-4 by Rob Bodington (04-11-09) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The capability should describe how and when to use the Class Unknown. The unknown class is used by a translator to recognize that something should be classified, but the classification is not known by the translator.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-06-23)
Added section under Additional usage guidance

Closed issue Issue: RBN-5 by Rob Bodington (05-07-08) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Figure 5 in assigning_reference_data template shows Class.description="/IGNORE" and External_class_library.description="$" They should be consistent.

The following attribute values are permitted:

Based on this, the following attributes should be set: External_class_library.description="$" Class.description="$"

Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-09-21)
Rejected. Guidelines for populating non-used attributes has changed in accordance with the approach used in the figure.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-6 by Rob Bodington (05-10-02) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The capability describes how to represent "Superclass information" and the fact that where an extension to PLCS reference data has occurred, standard classes should exchanged as superclasses. There should be a template to define this.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-10-03)
This is provided by the template assigning_business_specific_reference_data.

Closed issue Issue: GYL-7 by Leif Gyllstrom (05-10-04) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Change web adress for the PLCS RDL to urn:plcs:rdl:std in all examples. Decision made at the Core Team meeting in Bristol 05-09-21
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 05-10-04)
Added

Closed issue Issue: RBN-8 by Rob Bodington (06-01-17) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The PATH in assigning_business_specific_reference_data is incorrect It is using [{ which is unnecessary
Comment: (Rob Bodington 06-01-17)
Corrected

Closed issue Issue: RBN-9 by Rob Bodington (06-01-17) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Figure 9 and 10 do not show the reference parameter ext_class
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 2007-05-03)
The figures being adressed belongs to a template that has been deprecated.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-10 by Rob Bodington (06-01-19) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The PATH in assigning_reference_data is incorrect It includes External_class_library.id = @ecl_id External_class_library.id = '$'
Comment: (Rob Bodington 06-01-19)
Corrected

Closed issue Issue: PBM-1 by Peter Bergström (06-12-04) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Figures 5, 7 and 11 show the value of the External_class.id to be '/NULL', while the path syntax assign '/IGNORE' to the attribute. I believe it should be '/IGNORE' in the figures too.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 2007-05-03)
The mentioned inconcistensy only appears in the template that has been deprecated.

Closed issue Issue: PBM-2 by Peter Bergström (06-12-04) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Figure 9 is not an Express-G diagram, it's an instance diagram. Should be changed.
Comment: (Leif Gyllstrom 2007-05-03)
The mentioned inconcistensy only appears in the template that has been deprecated.