Issue 11301: The Notion of “Involvement” has not been Adequately Specified with in SBVR (sbvr-ftf) Source: Business Semantics Ltd. (Mr. Donald R. Chapin, Donald.Chapin(at)BusinessSemantics.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The ‘involvement’ Issue is as follows (from my email sent on Saturday): Issue Submitter’s Name: Donald Chapin Issue Submitter’s Company: Business Semantics Ltd (submitted as SBVR FTF Chair) Issue Submitter’s Email: Donald.Chapin@btinternet.com Issue Name: The Notion of “Involvement” has not been Adequately Specified with in SBVR Document No: dtc/06/03/01 Document Revision Date: March 2006 Document Version No: --- Chapter/Section: 8.1.1 Page No(s): 16 Nature of Issue: Revision Severity of Issue: Major Issue Description: The notion of Involvement has not totally been taken into account by the resolution of Issue 9948 as stated in that resolution. Several clarifications are needed regarding Involvement such as the nature of instance of roles (see the sum example in the initial 9948 statement). Resolution: Deferred to second SBVR Revision Task Force because there were more foundational issues that had to be resolved first, and it was very important SBVR v1.1 out as soon as they were done. Disposition: Deferred Revised Text: Actions taken: August 21, 2007: received issue Discussion: This Issue is a spin-off from Issue 9948 for a part that was not able to be completed in time. End of Annotations:===== mainKe••Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btinternet.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Reply-To:From:To:References:Subject:Date:Organization:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:X-MimeOLE:In-Reply-To; b=GRl0FVLcIDDgWgvdS7QIXlfRPe7i6/x3t8UfHHhJt8C/bTlFG44r35DVhIThi45hbNLaDKi0dWDyOmBNQIinsqLnIQyyugQJnP3JEx6iUrjV0aaKvgH8mIJlo2BMGL6UZ54csgyStlUJiK3dvhBakcldnd7jsBs8O8iJh7vqnRs= ; X-YMail-OSG: .Beq3RwVM1n0fXs964xCSto.D4pY1UaoX48H4AJez8LRHg9sLFhbb_IElXBJOslE9pGU_qpY7oVw.FeEJ8CK6l0- Reply-To: From: "Donald Chapin" To: "'Juergen Boldt'" Subject: RE: FW: SBVR Issue 9948 Spin-off Issue - The Notion of "Involvement" has not been Adequately Specified with in SBVR Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 18:40:38 +0100 Organization: Business Semantics Ltd X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AcfkGYT/IZJNRTDZQMq7bVGa/5jdZAAAC38w Juergen, Issue 11285 is a different Issue sent in at the same time: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Issue Submitter Name: Donald Chapin Issue Submitter Company: Business Semantics Ltd (submitted as SBVR FTF Chair) Issue Submitter Email: Donald.Chapin@btinternet.com Issue Name: SBVR has a Gap that Needs to be Filled by a Concept Role Playing of Thing in Occurrence Document No: dtc/06/03/01 Document Revision Date: March 2006 Chapter/Section: 8.1.1 Page No(s): 16 Nature of Issue: Revision Severity of Issue: Major Issue Description: 1. An SBVR metamodel noun concept (named something like role playing of thing in occurrence) that is very similar to object type fact type individual concept situational role(role type), or fact type rolein that it defines a kind of vocabulary entry that can be entered in an SBVR model is needed in SBVR. It omission represents a critical gap in SBVR. 2. Preferably this noun concept (role playing of thing in occurrence) would be a category (subtype) of object type; but it is much better to have the concept in the SBVR metamodel than to require it to be an object type, if that is too difficult (e.g. fact type role is not (a category/subtype of) an object type). 3. The meaning of this kind of SBVR model vocabulary entry would be that it talks about "the thingwith respect to (in the context of) its/his playing some role in a fact of a fact type, and so on for each thing that plays that role in a fact of that fact type. a. E.g. "the person with respect to (in the context of) his renting a given car on a given date", and so on for each person who rents a car on a date. 4. The extension of each vocabulary entry concept that is this kind of SBVR metamodel concept (role playing of thing in occurrence) must be in one to one correspondence with the actualities that are instances (and the facts [that correspond to the actualities]) that are of a given fact type which is identified in the definition of this kind of vocabulary entry. In the reference scheme below: a. The first part (a name of an individual concept that corresponds to the thing that fills the given fact type role) is the thing wee talking about i. Example: Joe Smith (the person) b. The second part (the fact type form of the fact type and a name of an individual concept that corresponds to the thing that fills each of the other fact type roles of the fact type) of the context of the role playing i. Example: with respect to (in the context of) Joe renting of car 1234 on July 30, 2007 (with respect to (in the context of) his renting a given car on a given date) 5. The instances in the extension of each vocabulary entry concept that is this kind of SBVR metamodel concept (role playing of thing in occurrence) must be the playingsof a given roleby a thingin the factsthat are for the fact typeidentified in the vocabulary entry concept definition. If I have not been clear, please let me know. Many Thanks, Donald -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: 21 August 2007 18:34 To: Donald.Chapin@btinternet.com Subject: Re: FW: SBVR Issue 9948 Spin-off Issue - The Notion of "Involvement" has not been Adequately Specified with in SBVR I sent this one out as issue 11285 about an hour ago -Juergen At 01:24 PM 8/21/2007, you wrote: Juergen, I haven received an Issue number for this yet. Many Thanks, Donald -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Donald Chapin [ mailto:Donald.Chapin@btinternet.com] Sent: 18 August 2007 14:16 To: 'issues@omg.org'; 'sbvr-ftf@omg.org' Subject: SBVR Issue 9948 Spin-off Issue - The Notion of "Involvement" has not been Adequately Specified with in SBVR Issue Submitter Name: Donald Chapin Issue Submitter Company: Business Semantics Ltd (submitted as SBVR FTF Chair) Issue Submitter Email: Donald.Chapin@btinternet.com Issue Name: The Notion of Involvement has not been Adequately Specified with in SBVR