Capability (C079):— representing_properties_numerically Date: 2012/05/21 19:35:57
Revision: 1.47
CoverContentsIntro.Overview Info. modelTemplatesCapabilities.Ref. dataIssues

Issue raised against: representing_properties_numerically

GENERAL issues

Closed issue Issue: TJT-2 by Tim Turner (05-04-11) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Version 1.21 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 the previous version to effect this.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 2006-06-08)
I think this has been done earlier, without closing this issue. The capability has been totally rewritten since the issue was made.

Closed issue Issue: TJT-1 by Tim Turner (04-03-22) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

There are no entities, types or functions defined for this capability (in the usage section). This means that DEX1, for example, cannot use this capability while the entities to be used are missing/undefined.
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-03-29)
Patience is a virtue.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-1 by Rob Bodington (04-03-25) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Need to link to other property capabilities C077: assigning_process_properties C078: assigning_resource_properties C076: assigning_product_properties C080: representing_properties_textually
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-03-29)
The links are already in the dependent and related capabilities section. Do you want them putting in somewhere else ?
Comment: (Rob Bodington 04-07-29)
Yes - I think that a <note> in the introduction and the business concept section would be helpful
Comment: (Rob Bodington 04-07-29)

Closed issue Issue: RBN-2 by Rob Bodington (04-03-25) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The EXPRESSG in the the information model section, I think that you need to explain what is a does not show property_representation, which is then described.
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-03-29)
This has now been changed to refer to the appropriate capabilities which provide the property_representation

Closed issue Issue: RBN-3 by Rob Bodington (04-03-31) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The capability should use extended_measure_representation module as well.
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
I think Tom Hendrix has now started a new capability for value range which deals with this. Do you still want to see it here ?
Comment: (Rob Bodington 04-07-29)
OK - Tom has created "Capability (C084):representing_property_value_ranges". I think that a <note> in the introduction and the business concept section mentioning this would be helpful
Comment: (Rob Bodington 04-09-29)
The introduction now refers to C084: representing_property_value_ranges.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-4 by Rob Bodington (04-04-06) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The express-g diagram should show all the property model, with the diagram shaded to show which is covered by which capability. The same applies to all property modules
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-007-28)
We have done this with the instance diagrams, but not the EXPRESS-G - Is this necessary with the EXP-G too ?.
Comment: (Rob Bodington 04-07-29)
I think that it is helpful to see as much of the EXPRESS-G model as possible. The problem with the modules is that they are so fine grained that it is hard to understand the complete model when just looking at a module. The capabilities are supposed to address this.
Comment: (Mike Ward 2004-01-06)
EXPRESS-G revised.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-5 by Rob Bodington (04-04-06) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The instance diagrams should be shaded to show which capability covering which part of the instance diagram. The same applies to all property modules
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
We have done this now..

Closed issue Issue: THX-1 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-07) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

*purpose of the Representing Properties capability is to* Change *Representing Properties* to *Representing Properties NUmerically*
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Done !

Closed issue Issue: THX-2 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-07) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

*the values of properties are represented* change to something like *the values of properties are represented numerically*
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Done !

Closed issue Issue: THX-3 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-07) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

EXAMPLE a mass property may be expressed as 1kg or as 2.2lbs put a space before the unit e.g. 2.2 lbs . I cant tell 1 from l.
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Done for both instances

Closed issue Issue: THX-4 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-07) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Add C084 as a related capability
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Done !

Closed issue Issue: THX-5 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-10) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

* ISO10303 uses properties extensively* Is *extensively* meant as a technical term (sets are defined intensively or extensively)?
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Er...no, I'm not clever enough to have meant that. I just meant they were used often. I'll change the wording ;)

Closed issue Issue: THX-6 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-10) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Part 43 says that numbers are not considered to be related unless they are in the same representation_context. For geometry this means you can't assume a common coordinate system. Not sure what it means here. But maybe the word *related* should be mentioned.
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
I fixed this by adding the text; "The STEP (ISO10303) standard uses the concept of representation context. All values in the same context are deemed to be related. This idea originates from geometrical representations, so that common coordinates systems could be identified. For numeric properties, the representation context can be used to group properties of a similar type - e.g. mass properties, time properties, etc. However, the extensive use of classification and reference data in PLCS has rendered the use of representation context less important."

Closed issue Issue: THX-7 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-10) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

When si_unit = .T. we have a well defined unit since they map to si_units. So I fear that classification may create possible conflict of semantics. Do we need to classify si units? The AP203 recommended practice says a measure should have SI units or else conversion based units that are based on an SI measure_with_units. The PLCS capability relies on classification. Does the PLCS standard reference data library cover conversion units?
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
I think this needs to be raised with the PLCS modellers and a decision made before I can close this issue. There are many cases where the PLCS classification could potentially conflict with existing STEP modelling practice, so I suspect this has been looked into before. I have mailed the PLCS exploder on this subject.
Comment: (Rob Bodington 05-01-13)
We should add a section in the capability describing the uses of Units. This should explain that the preferred approach is to classify Unit. It should explain that the sub classes of Units such as "Length_unit" can be used but is not necessary, in which case they would be classified. This approach is primariliy for compatibility with the PDM Schema. We should explain that all units are either SI base units or conversion based units, i.e. converted from the SI base units.
Comment: (Mike Ward 2004-01-06)
Classification structures have now been developed (in embryo form at least) for PLCS units and tentative agreement reached on the approach used.
Comment: (Rob Bodington 05-10-27)
The capability does not make it clear whether PLCS expects only the use of "Unit" or its subclasses, and if so, it does not explain the use of "Context_dependent_unit", "Conversion_based_unit", mass_units ect.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 06-05-31)
This capability no longer cover the use of units, this is moved to and handled by capability Representing_value_with_unit. These issues have been considered in the editing of that capability, and have hopefully been properly resolved there.

Closed issue Issue: THX-8 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-10) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

*Characterization of XXXX* Replace XXXX
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Done - has been replace with "Characterization of Numeric Properties"

Closed issue Issue: THX-9 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-10) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Figure 7 - instance #15 says metric representation but it has two rep items one has English unit. I think this example should have two instances each of Property_value_representation and Property_representation .
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
This must have already been fixed, as fig 7 has imperial and metric representations.

Closed issue Issue: THX-10 by Tom Hendrix (04-05-10) editorial issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Fix *(need links here)*
Comment: (Ian Bailey 2004-07-28)
Done, appropriate links have been inserted.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-6 by Rob Bodington (04-08-17) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The classification_assignments in the instance diagrams show "role" strings - these should be empty.
Comment: (Rob Bodington 04-09-28)
Corrected

Closed issue Issue: NN-1 by Nigel Newling (05-11-17) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Is the mandatory recording of the date and time when a property was assigned a value necessary? This is not always known or relevant. It would require a lot of extra entity instances to represent an unknown value. Same applies to person and organization characterisation.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 06-05-31)
Assignment of date and time, and organization, have been made optional.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-7 by Rob Bodington (05-11-23) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Add the templates: TEMPLATE: activity_property_value TEMPLATE: product_property_value
Comment: (Peter Bergström 06-05-31)
These are defined in capabilities Assigning_product_properties and Assigning_process_properties instead.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-8 by Rob Bodington (06-01-21) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

The diagram Figure 20 Entities instantiated by product_property_value template shows a Context_dependent_unit, is should be Unit according to the template
Comment: (Peter Bergstrom 06-01-21)
Corrected.

Closed issue Issue: PBM-1 by Peter Bergstrom (2006-04-28) major_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

Templates for the following capabilities must be harmonized:
C076: assigning_product_properties
C077: assigning_process_properties
C078: assigning_resource_properties
C080: representing_properties_textually
C079: representing_properties_numerically
C084: representing_property_value_ranges
C056: representing_evolution_of_property_values.
If possible, the document property capability C087: assigning_document_properties should also be harmonized with other properties.
In order to minimize the number of total templates for properties, the following structures of templates has been proposed:
1. assignment of the property (product, process, or resource)
2. association of a representation with an assigned property (i.e. associate a text property with a product property)
3. representation of a value (text, numerical, or a numerical range)
Number 1 and 2 above would exist in three different 'flavours', for products, processes (activities) and resources. Number 3 would be generic, and applicable to all.
If the current division of properties would be used, as in the capability C079: representing_properties_numerically where number 2 and 3 above are collapsed in one template, we would need agreat number of templates to represent all different types of numerical ranges in C084: representing_property_value_ranges, and we would not re-use the value representations at all.
See templates in capability C080: representing_properties_textually for an example of the propsed solution.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 06-05-31)
This change have been implemented.

Closed issue Issue: RBN-9 by Rob Bodington (06-06-19) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: closed

After Fig 5,6,7 add a list of the templates used in the diagram - this will make it easier to navigate.
Comment: (Peter Bergström 2007-05-17)
This change have been implemented.