Issue 11282: Role Names (bmm-ftf) Source: Inferware (Mr. John Hall, john.hall@modelsys.com johnhallms@hotmail.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The resolution for Issue 10090 proposed: · a convention for association names in the MOF model · dealing with role names as a separate issue This is that issue. Resolution: Role names were proposed with resolution 10090 for associations whose instances are between instances of the same class, e.g. Enabling Course of Action enables Enabled Course of Action, Broader Business Policy is composed of More Specific Business Policy. For the rest, suggestions are welcomed. Resolution: In resolution 10090, role names were proposed for associations whose instances are between instances of the same class, e.g. enabling course of action enables enabled course of action, broader business policy includes more specific business policy. For other associations, construct role names based on the class name and the verb phrase Revised Text: Add a new section at the end of Clause 9 9.5 Mapping of SBVR Structured English fact types to UML role names In the BMM Concepts Catalog, role names are defined for fact types in which both roles are played by the same noun concept, e.g. broader business policy includes more specific business policy. They are used in the corresponding association names is the BMM UML/MOF model, and represented in CamelCase, except that the first letter is in lower case, e.g. broader business policy maps to broaderBusinessPolicy. For other fact types, UML role names have been constructed using the verb and the noun concept term, e.g. tactic implements strategy maps to the UML role names implementingTactic and implementedStrategy. The following table provides the complete mapping. Change notice: All role names have been changed so that they begin with lower case letters. This is not marked with a change bar, so that changes to individual entries are easily identifiable. BMM fact type in SBVR Structured English 'From' Role 'To' Role assessment affects achievement of end judgingAssessment affectedEnd assessment affects employment of means judgingAssessment affectedMeans assessment identifies potential impact identifyingAssessment identifiedPotentialImpact assessment is judgment of influencer judgingAssessment judgedInfluencer assessment provides impetus for directive motivatingAssessment motivatedDirective broader business policy includes more specific business policy broaderBusinessPolicy moreSpecificBusinessPolicy broader course of action includes more specific course of action broaderCourseOfAction moreSpecficCourseOfAction broader desired result includes more specific desired result broaderDesiredResult moreSpecficDesiredResult business policy governs business process governingBusinessPolicy governedBusinessProcess business policy is basis for business rule baseBusinessPolicy derivedBusinessRule business process realizes course of action realizingBusinessProcess realizedCourseOfAction business rule guides business process guidingBusinessRule guidedBusinessProcess course of action channels efforts towards desired result supportingCourseOfAction supportedDesiredResult directive acts as regulation regulatingDirective directiveRegulation directive governs course of action governingDirective governedCourseOfAction directive is source of course of action baseDirective derivedCourseOfAction directive supports achievement of desired result supportingDirective supportedDesiredResult enabling course of action enables enabled course of action enablingCourseOfAction enabledCourseOfAction goal amplifies vision amplifyingGoal amplifiedVision mission makes operative vision deliveringMIssion operativeVision objective quantifies goal quantifyingObjective quantifiedGoal organization unit defines end definingOrganizationUnit definedEnd organization unit establishes means establishingOrganizationUnit establishedMeans organization unit is responsible for business process responsibleOrganizationUnit managedBusinessProcess organization unit makes assessment assessingOrganizationUnit madeAssessment organization unit recognizes influencer recognizingOrganizationUnit recognizedInfluencer potential impact provides impetus for directive motivatingPotentialImpact motivatedDirective strategy determines organization unit determiningStrategy determinedOrganizationUnit strategy is a component of the plan for mission missionComponent plannedMission tactic effects enforcement level of business rule effectingTactic enforcedBusinessRule tactic implements strategy implementingTactic implementedStrategy Revised Text: Actions taken: August 13, 2007: received issue January 15, 2008: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== s is issue # 11282 Role Names The resolution for Issue 10090 proposed: · a convention for association names in the MOF model · dealing with role names as a separate issue This is that issue. Resolution: Role names were proposed with resolution 10090 for associations whose instances are between instances of the same class, e.g. Enabling Course of Action enables Enabled Course of Action, Broader Business Policy is composed of More Specific Business Policy. For the rest, suggestions are welcomed. X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.0.16 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:45:11 -0500 To: John Hall , BMM FTF From: "Ronald G. Ross" Subject: Re: [BMM - REVISED BRS VOTE] Ballot 3 - EOB 30-Aug-07 John, There are at least 2 **serious errors** in the Resolution for 11282 that I just discovered. I ask that this Ballot be **withdrawn** immediately. Notwithstanding, BRS changes its vote from abstain to **NO**. Specifically, the Resolution indicates the following: (1) business rule guides business process ... OperativeBusinessRule ... GuidedBusinessProcess To follow the pattern you have set up in the table, the entry should read: business rule guides business process ... **Guiding**BusinessRule ... GuidedBusinessProcess (2) directive governs course of action ... ElementOfGovernance ... GovernedCourseOfAction To follow the pattern you have set up in the table, the entry should read: directive governs course of action ... **GoverningDirective** ... GovernedCourseOfAction As it stands, the Resolution **completely changes** the current meaning of these associations. It also changes the meanings that the Business Rules Group (BRG) always intended. It is against the position of Business Rule Solutions (BRS) and its practice of over 11 years with the BMM model. The resolution states its purpose and scope explicitly: "For other associations, construct role names based on the class name and the verb phrase." You have done far more than that in these 2 instances. Specifically, you have excluded the possibility that structural/definitional rules can "guide" business processes (etc.) or "govern" CoursesofAction. I object in the strongest terms. These changes has never been discussed or agreed. If anything, they falls more properly under Issue 10113 (or some other) where appropriate and open attention can be given to the matter. In any event, such major changes run counter the spirit of the OMG's RFC process as I understand it. Ron P.S. If I have missed anything in my analysis, please explain. I have only had a short time to review this Ballot, which as far as I know, was not scheduled beforehand. In any event, I am quite sure these changes have never been agreed in any open forum. Business Rule Solutions, LLC votes "abstain" on these 2 issues. The intent of the "abstain" is to defer to others better qualified to make this call. Ron At 12:16 PM 8/29/2007, John Hall wrote: Hello all, These two issues (two parts of the same requirement) have been under discussion for a long time, and several drafts have been circulated. The only comments I had in response to yesterday.s request were from Pete Rivettand Andy Evans, and I have incorporated them. Could you, please, vote by EOB 30 August 2007 on: Issue 10090: Base UML association names on fact type representations in the Concepts Catalog Yes [ ] No[ ] Abstain [ ] Issue 11282: Base UML role names on terms and verbs used in fact type representations in the Concepts Catalog Yes [ ] No[ ] Abstain [ ] Voting members are: 88solutions, Manfred Koethe Adaptive, Pete Rivett Business Rule Solutions, Ron Ross Business Semantics Ltd, Donald Chapin Deere & Company, Duane Clarkson EDS, Fred Cummins Fair, Isaac, James Taylor Inferware, Allan Kolber KnowGravity, Markus Schacher MEGA International, Antoine Lonjon Model Driven Solutions, Cory Casanave NIST , Ed Barkmeyer Neumont University, Tony Morgan No Magic, Bobbin Teegarden Pegasystems, John Pellant Rule ML Initiative, Said Tabet TIBCO, Paul Vincent Unisys, David Bridgeland Thanks, John X-Originating-IP: [86.2.188.23] From: John Hall To: BMM FTF Subject: [BMM] Update on Issue 11282 UML Role Names Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 03:02:31 +0000 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Aug 2007 03:02:31.0984 (UTC) FILETIME=[3521E300:01C7EAB2] Hello all, Attached is an update of the disposition document for Issue 11282 (UML Role Names) The changes are: 1) Correction of three errors in the editing instructions: OperativeBusinessRule and ElementOfGovernance were included in error. They are part of a proposal for another issue that has not yet been balloted. They have been replaced by GuidingBusinessRule and GoverningDirective, respectively. Misunderstanding of the UML convention for role names. They now all start with lower-case letters. An older version of the role names for .mission makes operative vision. was included. The role names are now deliveringMission and operativeVision. I think that correction of errors is legitimate within a ballot. 2) Changes suggested to improve role names derivedCourseOfAction has replaced formulatededCourseOfAction assessingOrganizationUnit has replaced makingOrganizationUnit Does anyone on the FTF think that making these two improvements of role names justifies pulling the issue from the ballot? If so, I would rather revert to the original versions and leave the issue in the ballot. There was some disagreement on the other changes suggested. Given that the BMM was adopted via RFC, and the changes suggested are to things that are in the BMM as adopted, I suggest leaving them unchanged. Issues can be raised for RTF if necessary. Regards, John BMM Issue 11282 Role Names V3.doc DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=SSHZSePX//UdfY92tjvhpHaeWLZoQD2Y4qdwIaqbfJURoijL0A/aImb9i4ykhyI8JQMHaUhArZDqR+Hw/wFc6mqaEUg8gsslC0tANbp3E0I1xlUXfp96Y9luJbzRjSTOo0X9JJPGogBwCmYg+O4tJw6jf+wHwrct21vqGs+YwpE=; X-YMail-OSG: vGHOkYoVM1kyVJq7DObPyHUZ9Re.tOfWzU0UaapW9z.S4kdyOtFoMFP5HpsVuLUPHsScKvh8Qbh8W5VezbSITQyZgYkRSUNh1c3rdLOcG3q0Q7Z9Ln_DGXw5LmxSsg-- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:26:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Allan Kolber Subject: Re: [BMM] Update on Issue 11282 UML Role Names To: John Hall , BMM FTF I agree with the correction of errors, the changes in role names, and the tabling of other changes for future handling. Allan John Hall wrote: Hello all, Attached is an update of the disposition document for Issue 11282 (UML Role Names) The changes are: 1) Correction of three errors in the editing instructions: OperativeBusinessRule and ElementOfGovernance were included in error. They are part of a proposal for another issue that has not yet been balloted. They have been replaced by GuidingBusinessRule and GoverningDirective, respectively. Misunderstanding of the UML convention for role names. They now all start with lower-case letters. An older version of the role names for .mission makes operative vision. was included. The role names are now deliveringMission and operativeVision. I think that correction of errors is legitimate within a ballot. 2) Changes suggested to improve role names derivedCourseOfAction has replaced formulatededCourseOfAction assessingOrganizationUnit has replaced makingOrganizationUnit Does anyone on the FTF think that making these two improvements of role names justifies pulling the issue from the ballot? If so, I would rather revert to the original versions and leave the issue in the ballot. There was some disagreement on the other changes suggested. Given that the BMM was adopted via RFC, and the changes suggested are to things that are in the BMM as adopted, I suggest leaving them unchanged. Issues can be raised for RTF if necessary. Regards, John -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.