Issue 16665: Date-Time Issue - granularity appears twice (date-time-ftf) Source: Business Semantics Ltd. (Mr. Donald R. Chapin, Donald.Chapin(at)BusinessSemantics.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The term "granularity" has two glossary entries, one in clause 8.2, and another in D.4. One should be renamed to avoid confusion, although they mean almost the same thing. Proposed Resolution: (The submission team adopted this resolution after the final submission. The change is recorded here as an Issue so that it can be considered by the FTF.) Under "time scale has granularity" in clause 8.2, add a new Necessity: Necessity: The scale of the time scale is the granularity of the time scale if and only if the granularity of the time scale is a precise time unit. In Annex E.3: • rename the glossary entry "granularity" to "scale granularity" • rename the glossary entry "scale has granularity" to "scale has scale granularity" • reword the Necessity under " scale has scale granularity" to read: Necessity: Each scale has at most one scale granularity. • Add 1 note and 2 examples: Note: Time scales are kinds of scales, but time scales of nominal time units (which are not true measurement units) do not have true scale granularities (which are always measurement units). Example: The Gregorian years scale has a granularity of 'year'. This granularity is the scale granularity of the scale. Example: The Gregorian months scale has a granularity of 'month'. This scale does not have a scale granularity because 'month' is a nominal time unit, not a precise time unit. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: November 16, 2011: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== sposition: ??? OMG Issue No: 16665 Title: Granularity Appears Twice Source: Donald Chapin . Businss Semantics Ltd - Donald.Chapin@btinternet.com Summary: The term "granularity" has two glossary entries, one in clause 8.2, and another in D.4. One should be renamed to avoid confusion, although they mean almost the same thing. Proposed Resolution: (The submission team adopted this resolution after the final submission. The change is recorded here as an Issue so that it can be considered by the FTF.) Under "time scale has granularity" in clause 8.2, add a new Necessity: Necessity: The scale of the time scale is the granularity of the time scale if and only if the granularity of the time scale is a precise time unit. In Annex E.3: . rename the glossary entry "granularity" to "scale granularity" . rename the glossary entry "scale has granularity" to "scale has scale granularity" . reword the Necessity under " scale has scale granularity" to read: Necessity: Each scale has at most one scale granularity. . Add 1 note and 2 examples: Note: Time scales are kinds of scales, but time scales of nominal time units (which are not true measurement units) do not have true scale granularities (which are always measurement units). Example: The Gregorian years scale has a granularity of 'year'. This granularity is the scale granularity of the scale. Example: The Gregorian months scale has a granularity of 'month'. This scale does not have a scale granularity because 'month' is a nominal time unit, not a precise time unit. Resolution: Revised Text: Disposition: ??? To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Subject: Fw: DTV Issue 16665 v 16676 - two granularities for two kinds of scales X-KeepSent: 6EECFA4A:2F6889B4-8525797D:00570F38; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 10:51:30 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 01/06/2012 10:51:34 x-cbid: 12010615-9360-0000-0000-0000022B6E9D Here are proposed resolutions that resolve 16665 and 16676 as discussed below. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research ----- Forwarded by Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM on 01/06/2012 10:50 AM ----- From: Mark H Linehan/Watson/IBM@IBMUS To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Date: 01/06/2012 09:47 AM Subject: Re: DTV Issue 16665 v 16676 - two granularities for two kinds of scales -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ed, I think you're absolutely right. I think that your argument that the members of "scale" are measurement units but the members of "time scale" are time points is conclusive. As you say, we don't need "scale" at all. I will prepare a proposed resolution for 16665 that deletes Annex D.4 entirely. And propose that we close 15576 as "Duplicate or Merged" with 16665. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research From: Ed Barkmeyer To: "date-time-ftf@omg.org" Date: 01/05/2012 05:57 PM Subject: Re: DTV Issue 16665 v 16676 - two granularities for two kinds of scales -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Investigation of issue 16676 (broken UML model for 'scale has scale point') leads to the following observation: The model of 'scale' as a specialization of 'sequence' that is in Annex D.4 was intended to represent the VIM concept of 'quantity scale'. Among other things, it says that a scale is identified (reference scheme) by its granularity . So, if we make granularity optional, two individual scales may have no distinguishing characteristic. The unstated intent (or perhaps a formerly stated intent) is that 'scale point' is a role that ranges over quantity values. Note that a scale like hardness does not have a granularity. So the model appears to be broken. The 'quantity scale' concept that would be used in DTV is a 'duration scale' -- a scale for measuring elapsed time. I can find _no mention_ of this concept anywhere in the DTV beta-1 specification. It is not clear that DTV needs to introduce the concept of duration scales (like stopwatches and 'Swiss timing'), except possibly in order to distinguish it from 'time scale'. The concept 'time scale' is defined and used extensively in DTV. Its "scale points" are categories of time intervals, not amounts of time. So there is no relationship between the concept 'scale' in Annex D, and the concept 'time scale' in 9.3. All of the properties of a time scale, except its granularity, derive from its being a regular sequence. It doesn't measure anything -- it just names time intervals. And granularity is _not_ a valid reference scheme for time scales: year-of-days, month-of-days, and week-of-days all have the same granularity. (But there is only one scale for 'days' as amounts of time.) Issue 16665 says that a time scale has two different 'granularities' with conflicting ranges. (Actually it says the symbol 'granularity' is ambiguous, but that is only because both terms apply to time scales.) So, I propose the following: resolve Issue 16676 by deleting Annex D.4 outright. That has the property of resolving Issue 16665 by making the issue moot. It will necessitate some minor changes to 9.3. If instead we introduce 'duration scale', which is a meaningful specialization of '(quantity) scale', then we must keep Annex D.4 and address issue 16676, by making 'scale point' a role of 'quantity value', adding the appropriate necessities, and repairing the UML model accordingly. In either case, we must change the definition of 'time scale' to remove the erroneous specialization of 'quantity scale' and thus the incompatible specification of the 'granularity' attribute. So, do we add 'duration scale' and clarify D.4 or delete D.4? And can we fix the 'time scale is a scale' problem in response to 16665? Opinions please! -Ed P.S. If SBVR really supports 'attributive namespaces', as UML does, there is no requirement for the attributive term 'granularity' to be unique across the vocabulary -- the granularity of sugar or gravel and the granularity of a scale that quantifies their weights can range over different concepts, because the 'granularities' are attributive roles, not general concepts. The problem underlying Issue 16665 is that 'time scale' has two 'granularity' attributes and they have conflicting ranges. The range of the 'granularity' of the more general concept 'scale' is _narrower_ than the range of 'time scale'. That means a time scale with a granularity that is a nominal unit cannot be a scale, because the granularity of a scale must be a (precise) measurement unit. -- 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 Cel: +1 240-672-5800 "The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST, and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." Date-Time Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice2.doc Date-Time Issue 16676 - scale has scale point.doc To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Subject: Issue 16665: Granularity Appears Twice X-KeepSent: 000F21B7:3AA984D9-8525796B:004C9CBD; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:57:40 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 12/19/2011 08:57:40 x-cbid: 11121913-3534-0000-0000-000003BD2B02 Proposed resolution: -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research Date-Time Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice.doc To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Subject: Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice X-KeepSent: 72511E49:138A456B-85257981:00750C5B; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:17:14 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 01/10/2012 16:17:15 x-cbid: 12011021-5112-0000-0000-000003E9E001 Here is an updated fix, which I worked on with Ed. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research Date-Time Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice2.doc To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Subject: Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice (yet again) X-KeepSent: 2AF48C1D:E4AAE0CD-85257981:00798C01; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:07:19 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 01/10/2012 17:07:21 x-cbid: 12011022-3534-0000-0000-00000468C611 Ed discovered a few more diagrams that need to be updated. So here's a further revision to this issue resolution: -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Subject: Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice -- third try X-KeepSent: 90784FC1:DFCA454E-85257982:00613311; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 12:40:28 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 01/11/2012 12:40:31 x-cbid: 12011117-3534-0000-0000-0000046F1E4A Ed and I worked together to make some more minor changes: -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research To: date-time-ftf@omg.org Subject: updated resolution for issue 16665 X-KeepSent: 89274C96:57B9A8C1-8525796B:00680C64; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:57:53 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 12/19/2011 13:57:54 x-cbid: 11121918-1976-0000-0000-000008B89F7B Ed -- this issue resolution needs a minor update to figure 9.2 to show that "granularity" has multiplicity 0..1. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research Date-Time Issue 16665 - granularity appears twice1.doc