Issue 17430: Views should be Normative (updm-2-0-rtf) Source: Independent (Mr. Leonard F. Levine, llvienna2(at)aol.com) Nature: Enhancement Severity: Critical Summary: While the proper implementation of a UPDM 2.0 Profile assures successful exchange of data models, the exact content of the VIEWS remain non-normative. There needs to be a definition of the minimum data elements to support each view as well as optional data elements. The UPDM RTF Group needs to discuss whether all (52?) Views need to be made NORMATIVE, how to support Optional data, and how to support the required USER-DEFINED VIEWS. Resolution: Views and viewpoints are contraversial in terms of how they are defined and there practicality in usage. There is also a lot of conflict with how XMI works what would be required to support this practically, at the moment View and Viewpoint in SysML are impractical to use and the do not relate to how the terms View and Viewpoint are used in DoDAF 2.0/MODAF. This confusion is added to when PES is considered. This issue was deferred on the ground that this issue requires a lot of discussion that goes beyond our current time frame for UPDM 2.1 RTF. Although we have made a start on it. Proposed Disposition: Deferred Revised Text: Actions taken: June 14, 2012: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Jun 2012 13:22:48 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Leonard F. Levine Employer: Department of Defense (DoD CIO & DISA) mailFrom: Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM) Section: Annex B - UPDM Views (Profile) FormalNumber: formal/2012-01-03 Version: Version 2.0 Doc_Year: 2012 Doc_Month: January Doc_Day: Day Page: 261-294 Title: Views should be Normative Nature: Enhancement Severity: Critical CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Description: To assure fuller interoperability of DoDAF and MODAF , the "VIEWS" also known as the "Products" need to be made NORMATIVE. =========================================== =========================================== Rationale: While the proper implementation of a UPDM 2.0 Profile assures successful exchange of data models, the exact content of the VIEWS remain non-normative. There needs to be a definition of the minimum data elements to support each view as well as optional data elements. The UPDM RTF Group needs to discuss whether all (52?) Views need to be made NORMATIVE, how to support Optional data, and how to support the required USER-DEFINED VIEWS. Respectfully, Len Levine (DoD-CIO and DoD EA for IT Standards (DISA) From: "Levine, Leonard Frederick (Len Levine @ DISA) CIV DISA EE (US)" To: "Okon, Walter J CIV (US)" CC: Matthew Hause , Graham Bleakley , Daniel Brookshier , "updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org" Subject: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue Thread-Topic: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue Thread-Index: AQHNSzFJv5dc2oh9a0Wz3Nu39fLaiZcAON2A Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 15:42:40 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [214.21.83.136] I know this will be controversial for some. I strongly believe that, at the this stage of the maturity of UPDM, some of the Views/Products should be supported by all tools and should be interchangeable. I further believe that the minimal set should support those currently required for the JCIDS process. However, I am not pressing for inclusion of all of the 52-varieties of views. I hope the UPDM Group should spend an hour discussing this issue this week in Cambridge, MA -- and at subsequent inter-session teleconferences. Regards and respects to all, Len Levine, US DoD, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) ATTN: Leonard F. Levine /Code EE31 P.O. Box 549 Ft. Meade, MD 20755-0549 Room A4B57D Telephone: 301-225-7497 Mobile: 703-861-4822 NEW E-MAIL (June 2012): Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil -----Original Message----- From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 3:58 PM To: issues@omg.org; updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Jun 2012 13:22:48 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Leonard F. Levine Employer: Department of Defense (DoD CIO & DISA) mailFrom: Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM) Section: Annex B - UPDM Views (Profile) FormalNumber: formal/2012-01-03 Version: Version 2.0 Doc_Year: 2012 Doc_Month: January Doc_Day: Day Page: 261-294 Title: Views should be Normative Nature: Enhancement Severity: Critical CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Description: To assure fuller interoperability of DoDAF and MODAF , the "VIEWS" also known as the "Products" need to be made NORMATIVE. =========================================== =========================================== Rationale: While the proper implementation of a UPDM 2.0 Profile assures successful exchange of data models, the exact content of the VIEWS remain non-normative. There needs to be a definition of the minimum data elements to support each view as well as optional data elements. The UPDM RTF Group needs to discuss whether all (52?) Views need to be made NORMATIVE, how to support Optional data, and how to support the required USER-DEFINED VIEWS. Respectfully, Len Levine (DoD-CIO and DoD EA for IT Standards (DISA) Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services 140 Kendrick Street, Building A Suite 300 Needham, MA 02494 USA Tel: 781 444 0404 x 132 fax: 781 444 0320 www.omg.org [] smime10.p7s X-Disclaimed: 10782 To: "Levine, Leonard Frederick (Len Levine @ DISA) CIV DISA EE (US)" Cc: Daniel Brookshier , Matthew Hause , "updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org" , "Okon, Walter J CIV (US)" Subject: Re: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue X-KeepSent: A03BD4CC:F4C0CE16-80257A21:005D7F43; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5.1 September 28, 2009 From: Graham Bleakley Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:06:38 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D06ML008/06/M/IBM(Release 8.5.2FP1 ZX852FP1HF12|September 28, 2011) at 18/06/2012 18:06:39, Serialize complete at 18/06/2012 18:06:39 x-cbid: 12061817-8372-0000-0000-000002E9FB1E Hi Len This may be easy to specify but I can tell you it is hard to implement in the tools. There is a lot to talk about here and I want to be part of these discussions, I have time on Wednesday AM EST upto around 2 PM EST if we could do a call then to start the discussion I would be happy to join. There are big differences between what DoDAF 2.0 calls views/products/models and what UPDM 2.0 calls Views/products and this needs to be explained. All the best Graham Dr Graham Bleakley Solution Architect, Unleash the Labs Mobile +44 (0)7740 881280 E-mail graham.bleakley@uk.ibm.com To request my assistance please use the ULL link below https://sma-cqwebvm01.ratl.swg.usma.ibm.com/CRT/NewRecord?recordType=request From: "Levine, Leonard Frederick (Len Levine @ DISA) CIV DISA EE (US)" To: "Okon, Walter J CIV (US)" Cc: Matthew Hause , Graham Bleakley/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Daniel Brookshier , "updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org" Date: 18/06/2012 16:43 Subject: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I know this will be controversial for some. I strongly believe that, at the this stage of the maturity of UPDM, some of the Views/Products should be supported by all tools and should be interchangeable. I further believe that the minimal set should support those currently required for the JCIDS process. However, I am not pressing for inclusion of all of the 52-varieties of views. I hope the UPDM Group should spend an hour discussing this issue this week in Cambridge, MA -- and at subsequent inter-session teleconferences. Regards and respects to all, Len Levine, US DoD, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) ATTN: Leonard F. Levine /Code EE31 P.O. Box 549 Ft. Meade, MD 20755-0549 Room A4B57D Telephone: 301-225-7497 Mobile: 703-861-4822 NEW E-MAIL (June 2012): Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil -----Original Message----- From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 3:58 PM To: issues@omg.org; updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Jun 2012 13:22:48 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Leonard F. Levine Employer: Department of Defense (DoD CIO & DISA) mailFrom: Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM) Section: Annex B - UPDM Views (Profile) FormalNumber: formal/2012-01-03 Version: Version 2.0 Doc_Year: 2012 Doc_Month: January Doc_Day: Day Page: 261-294 Title: Views should be Normative Nature: Enhancement Severity: Critical CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Description: To assure fuller interoperability of DoDAF and MODAF , the "VIEWS" also known as the "Products" need to be made NORMATIVE. =========================================== =========================================== Rationale: While the proper implementation of a UPDM 2.0 Profile assures successful exchange of data models, the exact content of the VIEWS remain non-normative. There needs to be a definition of the minimum data elements to support each view as well as optional data elements. The UPDM RTF Group needs to discuss whether all (52?) Views need to be made NORMATIVE, how to support Optional data, and how to support the required USER-DEFINED VIEWS. Respectfully, Len Levine (DoD-CIO and DoD EA for IT Standards (DISA) Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services 140 Kendrick Street, Building A Suite 300 Needham, MA 02494 USA Tel: 781 444 0404 x 132 fax: 781 444 0320 www.omg.org [] Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU From: "Levine, Leonard Frederick (Len Levine @ DISA) CIV DISA EE (US)" To: Graham Bleakley CC: Daniel Brookshier , Matthew Hause , "updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org" , "Okon, Walter J CIV (US)" Subject: RE: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue Thread-Topic: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue Thread-Index: AQHNSzFJv5dc2oh9a0Wz3Nu39fLaiZcAON2AgAAaMgCAAFNwsA== Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 22:08:32 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [214.21.83.136] I am happy that we will BEGIN addressing the issue. I know that there are technical issues that I don't appreciate but would like to do so. I still think we can make progress, even if limited. Len -----Original Message----- From: Graham Bleakley [mailto:graham.bleakley@uk.ibm.com] Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 1:07 PM To: Levine, Leonard Frederick (Len Levine @ DISA) CIV DISA EE (US) Cc: Daniel Brookshier; Matthew Hause; updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org; Okon, Walter J CIV (US) Subject: Re: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue Hi Len This may be easy to specify but I can tell you it is hard to implement in the tools. There is a lot to talk about here and I want to be part of these discussions, I have time on Wednesday AM EST upto around 2 PM EST if we could do a call then to start the discussion I would be happy to join. There are big differences between what DoDAF 2.0 calls views/products/models and what UPDM 2.0 calls Views/products and this needs to be explained. All the best Graham Dr Graham Bleakley Solution Architect, Unleash the Labs Mobile +44 (0)7740 881280 E-mail graham.bleakley@uk.ibm.com To request my assistance please use the ULL link below https://sma-cqwebvm01.ratl.swg.usma.ibm.com/CRT/NewRecord?recordType=request From: "Levine, Leonard Frederick (Len Levine @ DISA) CIV DISA EE (US)" To: "Okon, Walter J CIV (US)" Cc: Matthew Hause , Graham Bleakley/UK/IBM@IBMGB, Daniel Brookshier , "updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org" Date: 18/06/2012 16:43 Subject: FW: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue ________________________________ I know this will be controversial for some. I strongly believe that, at the this stage of the maturity of UPDM, some of the Views/Products should be supported by all tools and should be interchangeable. I further believe that the minimal set should support those currently required for the JCIDS process. However, I am not pressing for inclusion of all of the 52-varieties of views. I hope the UPDM Group should spend an hour discussing this issue this week in Cambridge, MA -- and at subsequent inter-session teleconferences. Regards and respects to all, Len Levine, US DoD, Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) ATTN: Leonard F. Levine /Code EE31 P.O. Box 549 Ft. Meade, MD 20755-0549 Room A4B57D Telephone: 301-225-7497 Mobile: 703-861-4822 NEW E-MAIL (June 2012): Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil -----Original Message----- From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org ] Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 3:58 PM To: issues@omg.org; updm-2-0-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 17430 -- UPDM 2.0 RTF issue From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Jun 2012 13:22:48 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Leonard F. Levine Employer: Department of Defense (DoD CIO & DISA) mailFrom: Leonard.F.Levine.civ@mail.mil Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM) Section: Annex B - UPDM Views (Profile) FormalNumber: formal/2012-01-03 Version: Version 2.0 Doc_Year: 2012 Doc_Month: January Doc_Day: Day Page: 261-294 Title: Views should be Normative Nature: Enhancement Severity: Critical CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Description: To assure fuller interoperability of DoDAF and MODAF , the "VIEWS" also known as the "Products" need to be made NORMATIVE. =========================================== =========================================== Rationale: While the proper implementation of a UPDM 2.0 Profile assures successful exchange of data models, the exact content of the VIEWS remain non-normative. There needs to be a definition of the minimum data elements to support each view as well as optional data elements. The UPDM RTF Group needs to discuss whether all (52?) Views need to be made NORMATIVE, how to support Optional data, and how to support the required USER-DEFINED VIEWS. Respectfully, Len Levine (DoD-CIO and DoD EA for IT Standards (DISA) Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services 140 Kendrick Street, Building A Suite 300 Needham, MA 02494 USA Tel: 781 444 0404 x 132 fax: 781 444 0320 www.omg.org > [] > Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU smime12.p7s