Issue 16519: Multiple Fact types/Rolebindings in a Claim Statement (sacm-rtf)
Source: MITRE (Mr. Samuel Redwine, samredwine(at)verizon.net)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Significant
Summary: Claim true-false statements in SBVR can contain a variety of kinds of concerns. A variety of terms and values can occur. The diagram appears to show/allow only one facttype. Is this appropriate?
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
August 25, 2011: received issue
Discussion: 
Deferred - SBVR for claims in ARM to be looked at only in RTF
Disposition: Deferred
End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 25 Aug 2011 13:29:23 -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:         Multiple Fact types/Rolebindings in a Claim Statement
Nature:        Revision
Severity:      Significant
test:          3qw8
B1:            Report Issue


Description:

Claim true-false statements in SBVR can contain a variety of kinds of concerns. A variety of terms and values can occur. The diagram appears to show/allow only one facttype. Is this appropriate?