Issue 10114: Section: 7, ,8, 9 - pages 16, 40-42, and 51 (bmm-ftf) Source: Inferware (Mr. John Hall, john.hall@modelsys.com johnhallms@hotmail.com) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant Summary: Assessment In BMM 1.2, as published by the BRG and adopted by the OMG, “Assessment” is defined as: “a judgement that an Influencer affects the employment of Means or the achievement of Ends” Each Assessment: - Is a judgment about at least one Influencer - Is about the effect on least one End or Means (but not necessarily both) The UML class model submitted with the RFC shows both an End and a Means being required for an Assessment. What is the best way to represent Assessment in a MOF-compliant class model for BMM so that the constraint is correctly modeled, and BMM-compliant tools will support “End or Means or both - but not neither”? Resolution: In the BMM as published, "Assessment" is an objectified ternary fact type with roles played by Influencer, Means and End, and the constraint that at least one Influencer and at least one End or Means must participate in a fact of this type - there might be no participating Ends or no participating Means, but no participation from either is not allowed. This cannot be handled in a MOF model. The proposed resolution is: In the overview UML diagram in Ch 7 and Figure 8.13 in Ch 8, represent Assessment as a class with binary associations with Influencer, End and Means (as well as Potential Impact) Specify these associations as: · Assessment is judgment of Influencer (one to many) [This would resolve Issue 10592] · Assessment affects achievement of Ends (many to many) [This would resolve Issue 10593] · Assessment affects employment of Means (many to many) State the constraint "at least one End or Means but not necessarily both" in the concepts catalog in Ch 9. Note: if you do not like the names suggested, please suggest alternatives. There are no names for them in the BMM as published. The changes to the UML model are illustrated in the fragment: This diagram illustrates the structure. Class names are shown in CamelCase, and association names include class names. Depending on what is agreed for resolution of Issue 10090 (UML Associations), the names might change, but the structure would be the one proposed. Revised Text: 1) Replace figure 8.13 with the one below: 2) Replace figure 8.14 with the one below: 3) Make corresponding changes to the overall UML Model in clause 7 4) Include the following entries in the Concepts Catalog (Clause 9) in SBVR Structured English: assessment General Concept: motivation element Definition: judgment that an influencer affects the employment of means and/or the achievement of ends Dictionary Basis to analyze critically and judge definitively the nature, significance, status, or merit of: determine the importance, size, or value of [MWUD 'assess' (4)] Note: If an assessment is related to both a means and an end, then this suggests that the particular means is somehow related to the particular end. Specifically, if there is not a fact relating them - such as 'course of action channels efforts towards desired result' or 'directive supports achievement of desired result' - then careful consideration should be given to that omission. assessment expresses impact of influencer on end or means Necessity: Each assessment expresses impact of at least one influencer on at least one end or at least one means Note: the above ternary fact type and necessity are not mapped to the MOF/UML model . The binary fact types below are. assessment affects achievement of end Synonymous Form: end has achievement affected by assessment assessment affects employment of means Synonymous Form: means has employment affected by assessment assessment is judgment of influencer Synonymous Form: influencer is judged in assessment assessment provides impetus for directive Synonymous Form: directive has impetus provided by assessment assessment identifies potential impact Synonymous Form: potential impact is significant to assessment Necessity: Each assessment identifies at least one potential impact potential impact provides impetus for directive Synonymous Form: directive is motivated by potential impact Actions taken: August 22, 2006: received issue January 15, 2008: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 22 Aug 2006 07:47:59 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: John Hall Company: Model Systems mailFrom: john.hall@modelsys.com Notification: No Specification: BMM FAS Section: 7, ,8, 9 FormalNumber: dtc/06-08-02 Version: 1 RevisionDate: 08/07/2006 Page: 16, 40 - 42, 51 Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.8.0.6) Gecko/20060728 Firefox/1.5.0.6 Description Assessment In BMM 1.2, as published by the BRG and adopted by the OMG, .Assessment. is defined as: .a judgement that an Influencer affects the employment of Means or the achievement of Ends. Each Assessment: - Is a judgment about at least one Influencer - Is about the effect on least one End or Means (but not necessarily both) The UML class model submitted with the RFC shows both an End and a Means being required for an Assessment. What is the best way to represent Assessment in a MOF-compliant class model for BMM so that the constraint is correctly modeled, and BMM-compliant tools will support .End or Means or both - but not neither.? Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:36:06 -0500 From: John Hall Reply-To: john.hall@modelsys.com Organization: Model Systems User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: BMM FTF Subject: [BMM] Issue 10114 Assessment (second try) X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlx=0 adultscore=0 adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=3.1.0-0610180000 definitions=main-0611060054 Hello all, Attached is my proposal for BMM Issue 10114 - modeling the constraint on Assessment in MOF. Regards, John BMM Issue 10114 Assessment V2.doc Disposition: Resolved OMG Issue No: 10114 Title: BMM: Assessment Source: John Hall, Business Rules Group John Hall Summary: Assessment In BMM 1.2, as published by the BRG and adopted by the OMG, .Assessment. is defined as: .a judgment that an Influencer affects the employment of Means or the achievement of Ends. Each Assessment: · Is a judgment about at least one Influencer · Is about the effect on least one End or Means (but not necessarily both) The UML class model submitted with the RFC shows both an End and a Means being required for an Assessment. What is the best way to represent Assessment in a MOF-compliant class model for BMM so that the constraint is correctly modeled, and BMM-compliant tools will support .End or Means or both - but not neither.? Resolution: In the overview UML diagram in Ch 7 and Figure 8.13 in Ch 8, represent Assessment as a class with binary associations with Influencer, End and Means (as well as Potential Impact): State the constraint (at least one End or Means but not necessarily both) in the concepts catalog in Ch 9. Revised Text: No changes needed - provided in solution to Issue 10090 (UML Associations) Disposition: Resolved