Issue 16683: Define that Clause 10 ‘Fact Models’ are by Default Closed World Models (sbvr-rtf) Source: Rule ML Initiative (Mr. John Hall, john.hall(at)modelsystems.co.uk) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Spin-off from Issue 14843 (via Issue 15623 Issue Resolution into which it was Merged) The definition-based model specified in Clauses 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 and the fact model defined in Clause 10 are different (although closely related) models. The differences between them should be described and a transformation from one to the other defined. This would address two concerns: 1. Allow the definition-based model to have an open-world assumption and the fact model to have a closed-world assumption. The proposed resolution is: 1. Define that Clause 10 ‘fact models’ are by default closed world models Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: November 14, 2011: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== MG Issue No: 16683 Title: Define that Clause 10 .Fact Models. are by Default Closed World Models Source: RuleML, John Hall, (john.hall@modelsystems.co.uk) Summary: Spin-off from Issue 14843 (via Issue 15623 Issue Resolution into which it was Merged) The definition-based model specified in Clauses 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 and the fact model defined in Clause 10 are different (although closely related) models. The differences between them should be described and a transformation from one to the other defined. This would address two concerns: 1. Allow the definition-based model to have an open-world assumption and the fact model to have a closed-world assumption. The proposed resolution is: 1. Define that Clause 10 .fact models. are by default closed world models. To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution X-KeepSent: EDA11C9A:CE68CE16-85257948:0050D11C; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1FP5 SHF29 November 12, 2010 From: Mark H Linehan Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 09:43:22 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D01MC604/01/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF6|May 2, 2011) at 11/14/2011 09:43:30 x-cbid: 11111414-8974-0000-0000-000001E644C7 For the record, I think this is completely wrong. Clause 10 is very clear that it assumes an open-world model. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research From: "Donald Chapin" To: "Juergen Boldt" , , "sbvr-rtf " Date: 11/14/2011 08:35 AM Subject: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X-SpamScore: -26 X-BigFish: PS-26(z21cILzbb2dK9371Kc85fhzz1202hzz8275bh8275dhz31h2a8h668h839h61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:207.46.4.139;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:SKI;H:SN2PRD0302HT001.namprd03.prod.outlook.com;R:internal;EFV:INT From: Don Baisley To: "sbvr-rtf@omg.org" Subject: RE: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution Thread-Topic: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution Thread-Index: Acyi0biBHnqn6/FbSbuuV0FuWuHMoQACglMAAAmxSAA= Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:23:14 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [131.107.160.169] X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: SN2PRD0302HT001.namprd03.prod.outlook.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%59$Dn%OMG.ORG$RO%2$TLS%6$FQDN%131.107.125.5$TlsDn% X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-CrossPremisesHeadersPromoted: TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com X-CrossPremisesHeadersFiltered: TK5EX14HUBC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com I agree with Mark. People can choose closed, but the default is open and should stay open. Don From: Mark H Linehan [mailto:mlinehan@us.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 6:43 AM To: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution For the record, I think this is completely wrong. Clause 10 is very clear that it assumes an open-world model. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research From: "Donald Chapin" To: "Juergen Boldt" , , "sbvr-rtf " Date: 11/14/2011 08:35 AM Subject: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 23:41:47 +0000 From: John Hall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2 To: Mark H Linehan , "Donald E. Baisley" CC: sbvr-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution X-Mailcore-Auth: 4600872 X-Mailcore-Domain: 13170 Mark (and Don), It may be that the SBVR RTF will agree with you, but we have to follow the OMG process. This proposal was part of Issue 14843, submitted in December 2009 in response to some other issues, including 14241. Issue 14843 was subsequently merged into 15623, but this point was not addressed in the resolution of 15623. OMG rules say that when this happens, we have to create a spin-off issue for it. That's what I did. If the next RTF can decide quickly about it, so much the better. Regards, John On 14/11/2011 14:43, Mark H Linehan wrote: For the record, I think this is completely wrong. Clause 10 is very clear that it assumes an open-world model. -------------------------------- Mark H. Linehan STSM, Model Driven Business Transformation IBM Research From: "Donald Chapin" To: "Juergen Boldt" , , "sbvr-rtf " Date: 11/14/2011 08:35 AM Subject: New SBVR Issue "Define that Clause 10 'Fact Models' are by Default Closed World Models" -- Spin-off from Issue 15623 Resolution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Text inserted by Panda GP 2011: This message has NOT been classified as spam. If it is unsolicited mail (spam), click on the following link to reclassify it: It is spam! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------