Issue 15837: Error in Example for "noun concept nominalization" (sbvr-rtf) Source: International Business Machines (Mr. Mark H. Linehan, mlinehan(at)us.ibm.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: In clause 9.2.8, on page 71, the first example under "noun concept nominalization" is incomplete. The text says "In this example, ‘petrol’ is a mention of the concept ‘petrol’ which is used in the ‘type’ role of a fact type ‘quantity is of type’. " However, the formulation shown is missing the use of that fact type. Proposed resolution: Revise the example to read as follows. New/changed text indicated in red. Example: EU-Rent stores at least 300 kiloliters of petrol.” In this example, ‘petrol’ is a mention of the concept ‘petrol’ which is used in the ‘type’ role of a fact type ‘quantity is of type’. The statement is formulated by an at-least-n quantification. . The minimum cardinality of the quantification is 300. . The quantification introduces a first variable. . . The first variable ranges over the concept ‘kiloliter’. . The quantification scopes over an existential quantification. . . The existential quantification introduces a second variable. . . . The second variable ranges over the concept 'type' . . . The second variable is restricted by a noun concept nominalization. . . . . The noun concept nominalization binds to the second variable. . . . . The noun concept nominalization considers a projection. . . . . . The projection is on a third variable. . . . . . . The third variable ranges over the concept ‘petrol’. . . The existential quantification scopes over an atomic formulation. . . . The atomic formulation is based on the fact type ‘company stores thing’. . . . . The ‘company’ role is bound to the individual concept ‘EU-Rent’. . . . . The ‘thing’ role is bound to the first variable. . The at-least-n quantification is restricted by an atomic formulation. . . The atomic formulation is based on the fact type 'quantity is of type' . . . The 'quantity' role is bound to the first variable. . . . The 'type' role is bound to the second variable. (an alternate, and perhaps better, formulation would move the existential quantification of 'type' to the start) Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: November 18, 2010: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== s is issue # 15837 From: Mark H Linehan Disposition: New OMG Issue No: to be assigned Title: Error in Example for "noun concept nominalization" Source: Mark H. Linehan, IBM Research, mlinehan@us.ibm.com Summary: Proposed resolution: Revise the example to read as follows. New/changed text indicated in red. Example: EU-Rent stores at least 300 kiloliters of petrol.. In this example, .petrol. is a mention of the concept .petrol. which is used in the .type. role of a fact type .quantity is of type.. The statement is formulated by an at-least-n quantification. . The minimum cardinality of the quantification is 300. . The quantification introduces a first variable. . . The first variable ranges over the concept .kiloliter.. . The quantification scopes over an existential quantification. . . The existential quantification introduces a second variable. . . . The second variable ranges over the concept 'type' . . . The second variable is restricted by a noun concept nominalization. . . . . The noun concept nominalization binds to the second variable. . . . . The noun concept nominalization considers a projection. . . . . . The projection is on a third variable. . . . . . . The third variable ranges over the concept .petrol.. . . The existential quantification scopes over an atomic formulation. . . . The atomic formulation is based on the fact type .company stores thing.. . . . . The .company. role is bound to the individual concept .EU-Rent.. . . . . The .thing. role is bound to the first variable. . The at-least-n quantification is restricted by an atomic formulation. . . The atomic formulation is based on the fact type 'quantity is of type' . . . The 'quantity' role is bound to the first variable. . . . The 'type' role is bound to the second variable. (an alternate, and perhaps better, formulation would move the existential quantification of 'type' to the start) Revised Text: Subject: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution X-KeepSent: CA3D15E8:1F542644-852577F4:006E3D9A; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 15:05:02 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 12/09/2010 15:05:05 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER This is the resolution that we agreed during today's discussion: (See attached file: SBVR Issue 15837.doc) -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com SBVR Issue 15837.doc From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution Thread-Topic: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution Thread-Index: AQHLl9ysCOR+e/6as028LidVB9Iwb5ObdnmA Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 18:18:06 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.123.12] I reviewed Mark.s proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However, there were minor formatting problems which I fixed in the attached document. Most notably, the bottom four lines in the revised example needed to be indented by one more level. Other corrections make the revised example consistent with the original example (and others like it) in matters of spacing, underlying, use of smart quotes and periods at ends of sentences. The example fixed in Mark.s resolution is followed in the SBVR text by another example that builds on that first example. The changes to the first example need to be reflected in the second example, so I added the appropriate revision to the second example into the attached resolution. The change to the second example is small: The binding in the second example moves from .third. to .second. variable and the indenting level changes. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 12:05 PM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution This is the resolution that we agreed during today's discussion: (See attached file: SBVR Issue 15837.doc) -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com SBVR Issue 158371.doc Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution X-KeepSent: E5201A09:C763AE91-852577F8:0049E41E; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 08:28:31 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 12/13/2010 08:28:34 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER Don, Thanks for the corrections. However, regarding the second example, it's formulation can no longer "starts with that of the previous example and adds the following". I think the addition has to go right after the projection in the first example, not at the end. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Don Baisley ---12/11/2010 01:19:34 PM---I reviewed Mark's proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Date: 12/11/2010 01:19 PM Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I reviewed Markâs proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However, there were minor formatting problems which I fixed in the attached document. Most notably, the bottom four lines in the revised example needed to be indented by one more level. Other corrections make the revised example consistent with the original example (and others like it) in matters of spacing, underlying, use of smart quotes and periods at ends of sentences. The example fixed in Markâs resolution is followed in the SBVR text by another example that builds on that first example. The changes to the first example need to be reflected in the second example, so I added the appropriate revision to the second example into the attached resolution. The change to the second example is small: The binding in the second example moves from âthirdâ to âsecondâ variable and the indenting level changes. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 12:05 PM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution This is the resolution that we agreed during today's discussion: (See attached file: SBVR Issue 15837.doc) -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com[attachment "SBVR Issue 15837.doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] From: Don Baisley To: Mark H Linehan , "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution Thread-Topic: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution Thread-Index: AQHLl9ysCOR+e/6as028LidVB9Iwb5ObdnmAgANzLoD//9/QMA== Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 19:35:49 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.79] Here is another version of the resolution that changes the sentence Mark identified as problematic. Mark, feel free revise the wording further if you see fit. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 5:29 AM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution Don, Thanks for the corrections. However, regarding the second example, it's formulation can no longer "starts with that of the previous example and adds the following". I think the addition has to go right after the projection in the first example, not at the end. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Don Baisley ---12/11/2010 01:19:34 PM---I reviewed Mark's proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Date: 12/11/2010 01:19 PM Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I reviewed Mark.s proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However, there were minor formatting problems which I fixed in the attached document. Most notably, the bottom four lines in the revised example needed to be indented by one more level. Other corrections make the revised example consistent with the original example (and others like it) in matters of spacing, underlying, use of smart quotes and periods at ends of sentences. The example fixed in Mark.s resolution is followed in the SBVR text by another example that builds on that first example. The changes to the first example need to be reflected in the second example, so I added the appropriate revision to the second example into the attached resolution. The change to the second example is small: The binding in the second example moves from .third. to .second. variable and the indenting level changes. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 12:05 PM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution This is the resolution that we agreed during today's discussion: (See attached file: SBVR Issue 15837.doc) -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com[attachment "SBVR Issue 15837.doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] SBVR Issue 15837 v2.doc Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution X-KeepSent: 14211825:CB9BE4C3-852577F8:006D8D29; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:56:49 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 12/13/2010 14:56:53 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER This v2 looks fine. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Don Baisley ---12/13/2010 02:38:48 PM---Here is another version of the resolution that changes the sentence Mark identified as problematic. From: Don Baisley To: Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Date: 12/13/2010 02:38 PM Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is another version of the resolution that changes the sentence Mark identified as problematic. Mark, feel free revise the wording further if you see fit. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 5:29 AM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution Don, Thanks for the corrections. However, regarding the second example, it's formulation can no longer "starts with that of the previous example and adds the following". I think the addition has to go right after the projection in the first example, not at the end. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Don Baisley ---12/11/2010 01:19:34 PM---I reviewed Mark's proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Date: 12/11/2010 01:19 PM Subject: RE: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I reviewed Markâs proposed resolution to issue 15837 and found that every word was correct. However, there were minor formatting problems which I fixed in the attached document. Most notably, the bottom four lines in the revised example needed to be indented by one more level. Other corrections make the revised example consistent with the original example (and others like it) in matters of spacing, underlying, use of smart quotes and periods at ends of sentences. The example fixed in Markâs resolution is followed in the SBVR text by another example that builds on that first example. The changes to the first example need to be reflected in the second example, so I added the appropriate revision to the second example into the attached resolution. The change to the second example is small: The binding in the second example moves from âthirdâ to âsecondâ variable and the indenting level changes. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 12:05 PM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: SBVR Issue 15837 - agreed resolution This is the resolution that we agreed during today's discussion: (See attached file: SBVR Issue 15837.doc) -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com[attachment "SBVR Issue 15837.doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM] [attachment "SBVR Issue 15837 v2.doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM]