Issue 3960: Separation of Membership versus Role policy required.                                                                                                                                                   (negotiation-ftf)
Source: OSM (Mr. Stephen McConnell, mcconnell@osm.net)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: Significant
Summary: MembershipKind combines both the policy of a Membership and 
	the policy of different business roles within a membership. 
	These notions should be separated into independent control 
	objects.

Resolution:

	Resolution of this issue is proposed under EC/2000-10-02, 
	Part 2, involving the separation of membership and role
	policy into distinct types.
Resolution: see below
Revised Text: MembershipKind has been replaced by the MembershipModel and Role valuetypes.
Policy applicable to a MembershipModel as distinct to the policy associated to a Role has
been separated into the respective valuetypes MembershipPolicy and RolePolicy.
The Control valuetype replaces the SessionFramework::Element interface and serves as a base
type for Role.
valuetype Control
{
public CommunityFramework::Label label;
public CommunityFramework::Note note;
};
Role (together with MembershipModel) replace the MembershipKind interface. Role supports
the seperation of a business role parameters form Membership parameters and is contained
within a MembershipCriteria to describe the structure and policy of logical busienss roles of
associated users.
valuetype Role :
Control
{
public RolePolicy policy;
public CommunityFramework::Roles roles;
public boolean is_abstract;
};
valuetype RolePolicy
{
public long quorum;
public long ceiling;
public QuorumPolicy policy;
public QuorumAssessmentPolicy assessment;
};
MembershipModel is a valuetype used within a Criteria instance to define the construction
constraints and policies of a new Membership instance. MembershipModel together with Role
replace the MembershipKind interface specification.
valuetype MembershipModel :
Control supports Model
{
public MembershipPolicy policy;
public CommunityFramework::Role role;
};valuetype MembershipPolicy
{
public PrivacyPolicyValue privacy;
public boolean exclusive;
};
Actions taken:
October 16, 2000: received issue
February 27, 2001: closed issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
From: "Stephen McConnell" <mcconnell@osm.net>
To: "Juergen Boldt" <juergen@omg.org>
Cc: <issues@omg.org>, <negotiation-ftf@omg.org>,
   "Abdul Akram Ph. D." <abdul.akram@mail.sprint.com>,
   "Sanjeev Goyal" <sanjeev.k.goyal@ind.xerox.com>
Subject: Negotiation FTF Issues
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:17:22 +0200
Message-ID: <004101c03794$f2064ac0$0a01a8c0@osm.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.0810.800
Importance: Normal
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	      boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0042_01C037A5.B58F1AC0"
X-UIDL: -HAe93@]!!J1(!!e=>!!


Issue EEEE: Separation of Membership versus Role policy required.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Nature:

	Semitic conflict.

Severity:

	Medium.

Summary:

	MembershipKind combines both the policy of a Membership and 
	the policy of different business roles within a membership. 
	These notions should be separated into independent control 
	objects.

Resolution:

	Resolution of this issue is proposed under EC/2000-10-02, 
	Part 2, involving the separation of membership and role
	policy into distinct types.


Stephen J. McConnell, OSM sarl
digital products for global business
http://www.osm.net
mailto:mcconnell@osm.net 
[] 00-10-02.pdf 

[] 00-10-03.pdf 

[] 00-10-01.pdf