Issue 16511: Different Meanings of Different Variants/Versions of a Model Elements Need to be Labeled, e.g. for Claims (sacm-rtf)
Source: MITRE (Mr. Samuel Redwine, samredwine(at)verizon.net)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Significant
Summary: Claims and other items can have versions that simultaneously exist but have different meanings. For example, what a Claim might represent includes:
•       Required values
•       Planned values to be achieved
•       Supported (established, justified) values
Two or more of these can be relevant at the same time. 
A suggestion has been made that SBVR be used (within associated properties?) to make this distinction. This would require that SBVR be available for these contents. Use of a TaggedValue is another possibility. Regardless of what mechanism is used, some standardization should be included for the key meanings. 


Placing this distinction within the contents of claim true-false statement might be more awkward and not make it as readily handled by tools as having it reside in a property.

In any case, what is standardized needs to have precise definitions or distinguishable among multiple definitions (or explicitly made usage/implementation dependent?) as subtle variations in meaning are possible. Note that for some assertions differences might be entirely in the value for confidence.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
August 25, 2011: received issue
Discussion: 
Response: This is out of scope. There are mechanisms (tagged values, annotations or an explicit claim) to
support this. No model change.
Although the initial response was to close this issue, it is an important concern, and since it is related to the
use of SBVR to enhance the formality of assurance cases, the future RTF will include this issue for further
consideration.
Disposition: Deferred
End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 25 Aug 2011 13:17:25 -0400
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report


*******************************************************************************
Name:          Samuel T. Redwine, Jr.   
Company:       Sam Redwine Consulting
mailFrom:      samredwine@ieee.org
Notification:  Yes
Specification: Argumentation Metamodel (ARM) 
Section:       June Day 2 Diagram
FormalNumber:  ptc/2010-08-36
Version:       FTF - Beta 1
RevisionDate:  August 2010
Page:          All
Title:         Different Meanings of Different Variants/Versions of a Model Elements Need to be Labeled, e.g. for Claims
Nature:        Revision
Severity:      Significant
test:          3qw8
B1:            Report Issue


Description:


Claims and other items can have versions that simultaneously exist but have different meanings. For example, what a Claim might represent includes:
.       Required values
.       Planned values to be achieved
.       Supported (established, justified) values
Two or more of these can be relevant at the same time. 
A suggestion has been made that SBVR be used (within associated properties?) to make this distinction. This would require that SBVR be available for these contents. Use of a TaggedValue is another possibility. Regardless of what mechanism is used, some standardization should be included for the key meanings. 


Placing this distinction within the contents of claim true-false statement might be more awkward and not make it as readily handled by tools as having it reside in a property.

In any case, what is standardized needs to have precise definitions or distinguishable among multiple definitions (or explicitly made usage/implementation dependent?) as subtle variations in meaning are possible. Note that for some assertions differences might be entirely in the value for confidence.