Issue 4223: Define the Substitute Usage model (pdm-rtf) Source: NIST (Mr. Edward J. Barkmeyer, edbark(at)nist.gov) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Source: JPDM team (jpdm.team@mscsoftware.com) Summary: In 8.3.19, the intent of the Substitute relationship is clearly defined, but the rules for its usage are not. In particular, section 8.3.19 should specify that a Usage that plays the "base" role in a Substitute relationship cannot play the "substitute" role in a different Substitute relationship, or provide some other mechanism for disambiguating "base" Usages. In creating a unique Bill of Materials, it is necessary to have a conceptual "primary" or "base" Usage that is distinct from all "substitute" Usages. It is possible that there are multiple "base" Usages for different mutually exclusive Effectivity contexts; and it is possible that the base Usage for one Effectivity context is an admissible substitute Usage in another Effectivity context. In order to guarantee consistent interpretation of assembly models, the specification must address these aspects of the object model. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: March 14, 2001: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 10:18:31 -0500 From: Ed Barkmeyer Reply-To: edbark@cme.nist.gov Organization: NIST X-Sender: "Ed Barkmeyer" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: issues@omg.org CC: PDM RTF , JPDM Subject: 2 more PDM Enablers issues Issue 2 Title: Define the Substitute Usage model Source: JPDM team (jpdm.team@mscsoftware.com) Summary: In 8.3.19, the intent of the Substitute relationship is clearly defined, but the rules for its usage are not. In particular, section 8.3.19 should specify that a Usage that plays the "base" role in a Substitute relationship cannot play the "substitute" role in a different Substitute relationship, or provide some other mechanism for disambiguating "base" Usages. In creating a unique Bill of Materials, it is necessary to have a conceptual "primary" or "base" Usage that is distinct from all "substitute" Usages. It is possible that there are multiple "base" Usages for different mutually exclusive Effectivity contexts; and it is possible that the base Usage for one Effectivity context is an admissible substitute Usage in another Effectivity context. In order to guarantee consistent interpretation of assembly models, the specification must address these aspects of the object model. Thanks, -Ed -- Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@nist.gov National Institute of Standards & Technology Manufacturing Systems Integration Division 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8260 Tel: +1 301-975-3528 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8260 FAX: +1 301-975-4482