Issue 16279: Need for general facility for stating and handling issues (sacm-rtf)
Source: MITRE (Mr. Samuel Redwine, samredwine(at)verizon.net)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Significant
Summary: As everything is disputable (that is, can be challenged) and issues of many natures can arise, a general “Issue” facility is required. This should also span all of SACM. 


Currently, “EvidenceObservation” is used in the sense of “comment” or “issue”. Its name could be changed and its availability be made more general. Possibly it should include a sub-element with a more general name for issues that do not fit into current sub-element categories (or possibly not yet categorized).

While probably not belonging in the core compliance point, facilities for issue resolution need to be likewise generally applicable.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
May 26, 2011: received issue
Discussion: 
This seems a reasonable suggestion, apart from the proposed use of EvidenceObservation element. The
purpose of the later is to make statements about evidence related to relations between other evidence
statements.
On the other hand, the Evidence Metamodel already includes a ProjectObjective element as well as an
EvidenceRequest element. The former refers to an 'individual project requirement of an evidence collection
project". The later represents a "placeholder for an EvidenceItem to be collected during the evidence
collection project".
The scope of the resolution to this issue should include the Argumentation Metamodel, in particular, the
general solution should consider replacing the "toBeSupported" attribute of claims (see related issue 16692
and section 9.2.9 Claims).
Further discussion on this topic is deferred to the future RTF.
Disposition: Deferred
End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 26 May 2011 14:43:52 -0400
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report


*******************************************************************************
Name:            Samuel T. Redwine, Jr.
Employer:        Sam Redwine Consulting
mailFrom:        samredwine@ieee.org
Terms_Agreement: I agree
Specification:   Software Assurance Evidence Metamodel (SAEM)
Section:         11.5, 11.6
FormalNumber:    ptc/2010-08-37
Version:         FTF - Beta 1
Doc_Year:        2010
Doc_Month:       August
Doc_Day:         Day
Page:            63-68
Title:           Need for general facility for stating and handling issues
Nature:          Revision
Severity:        Significant
CODE:            3TMw8
B1:              Report Issue


Description:


As everything is disputable (that is, can be challenged) and issues of many natures can arise, a general .Issue. facility is required. This should also span all of SACM. 


Currently, .EvidenceObservation. is used in the sense of .comment. or .issue.. Its name could be changed and its availability be made more general. Possibly it should include a sub-element with a more general name for issues that do not fit into current sub-element categories (or possibly not yet categorized).

While probably not belonging in the core compliance point, facilities for issue resolution need to be likewise generally applicable.