Issue 15841: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept (sbvr-rtf) Source: International Business Machines (Mr. Mark H. Linehan, mlinehan(at)us.ibm.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. 2. In the Acrobat Reader "Bookmarks" tab of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as a sub-entry under "logical formulation constrains projection", rather than as a separate entry (as for "closed projection defines fact type". The problem occurs only in the convenience document, not in the formal adopted specification. See attached screen shot. Suggested Resolution: 1. Change the figure to match the text. 2. Fix the bookmark tab entry. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: November 23, 2010: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== ubject: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept X-KeepSent: 3F8A5A26:7BAE9C6D-852577E4:005697D9; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org, juergen@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP1 SHF20 February 10, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:53:33 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 11/23/2010 10:53:41 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. 2. In the Acrobat Reader "Bookmarks" tab of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as a sub-entry under "logical formulation constrains projection", rather than as a separate entry (as for "closed projection defines fact type". The problem occurs only in the convenience document, not in the formal adopted specification. See attached screen shot. Suggested Resolution: 1. Change the figure to match the text. 2. Fix the bookmark tab entry. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com From: Don Baisley To: Mark H Linehan , "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Subject: RE: SBVR Issue -- Error in Example for .noun concept n ominalization. Thread-Topic: SBVR Issue -- Error in Example for .noun concept nomin alization. Thread-Index: AcuLP7oNTk7M5BS6R3WlOZogJCflQA== Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:53:38 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.51.79] Mark, Good catch. I recommend introducing the .type. variable first, as you suggested. Also, where your added text says .The at-least-n quantification is restricted by.., it should say .The first variable is restricted by.., and those lines should be inserted right after .The first variable ranges over ... Of course, it will be .second variable. after moving making the .type. variable first. Best regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:43 PM To: juergen@omg.org; sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: SBVR Issue (See attached file: new issue 2010-11-18.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 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:33:59 -0500 From: Ed Barkmeyer Reply-To: edbark@nist.gov Organization: NIST User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) To: Mark H Linehan CC: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Subject: Re: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept X-NISTMEL-MailScanner-Information: Please contact postmaster@mel.nist.gov for more information X-NISTMEL-MailScanner-ID: oANLY4ck000876 X-NISTMEL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-NISTMEL-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-NISTMEL-MailScanner-From: edbark@nist.gov X-NISTMEL-MailScanner-Watermark: 1291152845.45587@a151hTqVOYlbRG1yxqQJVg X-Spam-Status: No X-NIST-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-NIST-MailScanner-From: edbark@nist.gov Mark H Linehan wrote: Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. Mark is almost right. In SBVR, almost any "noun concept" -- an object type or a situational role -- can be defined by a "closed projection" as used by example in Clause 9. Technically, however, a fact type role is not, and should not be, defined using any kind of projection -- a fact type role is defined implicitly as part of a verb concept, by the occurrence of its placeholder in a fact type form. Its formal definition per clause 9 is the use of the corresponding variable in a defining logical formulation. There is also an important difference in the kinds of "closed projections". In SBVR a "closed projection" can have an "auxiliary variable" -- a concept whose semantics is undefined -- and Don uses the "auxiliary variable" to represent the free variable on which a "situational role" is dependent. A definition of an object type cannot have an auxiliary variable. Thus, we call both projections "closed projections" in SBVR, and we call a free variable an "auxiliary variable". Since this thing is only used in definitions in clause 9, we can regard this as just an SBVR convention, even though these two kinds of formulation have significantly different semantics. The term "closed projection" means what we say it means -- a formal structure that has several variants with different meanings. I think the solution Mark recommends is best. We can ignore the fact that it doesn't apply to fact type roles. Otherwise, I suppose one could ask why 'fact type role' subtypes 'role' and 'noun concept'. As I look upon fact type role, I don't see that it has any property ascribed to noun concepts, except that placeholder is said to be a kind of designation, which is dubious, as some other issue pointed out. I agree that a fact type role is a concept, but it seems to me that its inclusion under 'noun concept' makes 'noun concept' a linguistic notion that has no consistent semantics that SBVR uses. -Ed -- Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@nist.gov National Institute of Standards & Technology Manufacturing Systems Integration Division 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694 "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST, and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." From: Don Baisley To: Mark H Linehan , "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" , Linda Heaton Subject: RE: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Thread-Topic: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Thread-Index: AQHLiyboaCVo6FYerk6awhbxbEq6fJN/1Blw Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:23:04 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.123.12] Here is an updated figure 9.12 which fixes the problem Mark saw. .object type. is replaced by .noun concept. in the figure so that it matches the text. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 7:54 AM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org; juergen@omg.org Subject: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. 2. In the Acrobat Reader "Bookmarks" tab of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as a sub-entry under "logical formulation constrains projection", rather than as a separate entry (as for "closed projection defines fact type". The problem occurs only in the convenience document, not in the formal adopted specification. See attached screen shot. Suggested Resolution: 1. Change the figure to match the text. 2. Fix the bookmark tab entry. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Projections.vsd ProjectionDiagram.docx From: Don Baisley To: Mark H Linehan , "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" , Linda Heaton Subject: RE: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Thread-Topic: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Thread-Index: AQHLiyboaCVo6FYerk6awhbxbEq6fJN/1BlwgAAEOcA= Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:43:52 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.123.12] Here is a better version of the diagram. The previous version had an inadvertent line redirection in the Word document. Please disregard the documents in the last email I sent. Thanks, Don From: Don Baisley Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 5:23 PM To: 'Mark H Linehan'; sbvr-rtf@omg.org; 'Linda Heaton' Subject: RE: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Here is an updated figure 9.12 which fixes the problem Mark saw. .object type. is replaced by .noun concept. in the figure so that it matches the text. Regards, Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 7:54 AM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org; juergen@omg.org Subject: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. 2. In the Acrobat Reader "Bookmarks" tab of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as a sub-entry under "logical formulation constrains projection", rather than as a separate entry (as for "closed projection defines fact type". The problem occurs only in the convenience document, not in the formal adopted specification. See attached screen shot. Suggested Resolution: 1. Change the figure to match the text. 2. Fix the bookmark tab entry. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Projections1.vsd ProjectionDiagram1.docx From: Don Baisley To: Mark H Linehan , "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" , Linda Heaton Subject: RE: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Thread-Topic: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept Thread-Index: AQHLiyboaCVo6FYerk6awhbxbEq6fJN/1BlwgAAEOcCAABC9wA== Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 02:39:02 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes Subject: Re: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept X-KeepSent: 6DE7114E:C7DC026E-852577E5:005D8A63; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP1 SHF20 February 10, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 12:13:37 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 11/24/2010 12:13:46 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER Regarding fact type roles -- I agree with Ed but this is a separate issue. Perhaps the glossary entry for "fact type role" should have a Necessity: "No fact type role has a definition". Regarding closed projections -- on this one, I disagree with Ed. The Notes under "closed projection defines noun concept " make it clear that an auxiliary variable can be used when defining an object type. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com Ed Barkmeyer ---11/23/2010 04:35:48 PM---Mark H Linehan wrote: > From: Ed Barkmeyer To: Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM@IBMUS Cc: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Date: 11/23/2010 04:35 PM Subject: Re: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark H Linehan wrote: > > Summary: > > There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept > "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 > > 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page > 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as > "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun > concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just > object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. > Mark is almost right. In SBVR, almost any "noun concept" -- an object type or a situational role -- can be defined by a "closed projection" as used by example in Clause 9. Technically, however, a fact type role is not, and should not be, defined using any kind of projection -- a fact type role is defined implicitly as part of a verb concept, by the occurrence of its placeholder in a fact type form. Its formal definition per clause 9 is the use of the corresponding variable in a defining logical formulation. There is also an important difference in the kinds of "closed projections". In SBVR a "closed projection" can have an "auxiliary variable" -- a concept whose semantics is undefined -- and Don uses the "auxiliary variable" to represent the free variable on which a "situational role" is dependent. A definition of an object type cannot have an auxiliary variable. Thus, we call both projections "closed projections" in SBVR, and we call a free variable an "auxiliary variable". Since this thing is only used in definitions in clause 9, we can regard this as just an SBVR convention, even though these two kinds of formulation have significantly different semantics. The term "closed projection" means what we say it means -- a formal structure that has several variants with different meanings. I think the solution Mark recommends is best. We can ignore the fact that it doesn't apply to fact type roles. Otherwise, I suppose one could ask why 'fact type role' subtypes 'role' and 'noun concept'. As I look upon fact type role, I don't see that it has any property ascribed to noun concepts, except that placeholder is said to be a kind of designation, which is dubious, as some other issue pointed out. I agree that a fact type role is a concept, but it seems to me that its inclusion under 'noun concept' makes 'noun concept' a linguistic notion that has no consistent semantics that SBVR uses. -Ed -- Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@nist.gov National Institute of Standards & Technology Manufacturing Systems Integration Division 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694 "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST, and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Subject: RE: issue 15841 -- SBVR RTF issue Thread-Topic: issue 15841 -- SBVR RTF issue Thread-Index: AQHLkAum+36gTqZzoUyx4yoJjrHlkpObgx7Q Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 16:44:38 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [157.54.123.12] A proposed resolution of issue 15841 based on agreement at last Thursday.s SBVR RTF meeting is attached. Best regards, Don From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 1:20 PM To: issues@omg.org; sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 15841 -- SBVR RTF issue Subject: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept X-KeepSent: 3F8A5A26:7BAE9C6D-852577E4:005697D9; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org, juergen@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP1 SHF20 February 10, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:53:33 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 11/23/2010 10:53:41 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. 2. In the Acrobat Reader "Bookmarks" tab of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as a sub-entry under "logical formulation constrains projection", rather than as a separate entry (as for "closed projection defines fact type". The problem occurs only in the convenience document, not in the formal adopted specification. See attached screen shot. Suggested Resolution: 1. Change the figure to match the text. 2. Fix the bookmark tab entry. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research phone: (914) 784-7002 or IBM tieline 863-7002 internet: mlinehan@us.ibm.com SBVR Issue 15841.doc Subject: RE: issue 15841 -- SBVR RTF issue X-KeepSent: 1D38AFD1:28F73D7A-852577F8:004A15E9; type=4; name=$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 08:29:28 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 12/13/2010 08:29:32 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER This resolution looks fine to me. -------------------------------- 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 11:47:13 AM---A proposed resolution of issue 15841 based on agreement at last Thursday's SBVR RTF meeting is attac From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Date: 12/11/2010 11:47 AM Subject: RE: issue 15841 -- SBVR RTF issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A proposed resolution of issue 15841 based on agreement at last Thursdayâs SBVR RTF meeting is attached. Best regards, Don From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 1:20 PM To: issues@omg.org; sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 15841 -- SBVR RTF issue Subject: SBVR Editorial Issue - closed projection defines noun concept X-KeepSent: 3F8A5A26:7BAE9C6D-852577E4:005697D9; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org, juergen@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP1 SHF20 February 10, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:53:33 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.0.2FP6|July 15, 2010) at 11/23/2010 10:53:41 X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER Summary: There are two minor editorial issues regarding the verb concept "closed projection defines noun concept" in clause 9.3 1. In figure 9.12 on page 77 of the adopted specification and on page 79 of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as "closed projection defines object type", rather than "... noun concept". Any noun concept should be definable this way, not just object types. The text is right and the graphic is wrong. 2. In the Acrobat Reader "Bookmarks" tab of the ballot 3 convenience document, the verb concept is shown as a sub-entry under "logical formulation constrains projection", rather than as a separate entry (as for "closed projection defines fact type". The problem occurs only in the convenience document, not in the formal adopted specification. See attached screen shot. Suggested Resolution: 1. Change the figure to match the text. 2. Fix the bookmark tab entry. -------------------------------- 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 15841.doc" deleted by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM]