Issue 5967: .Package, Component, Component Implementation Description elements, etc (deployment-ftf) Source: Raytheon (Mr. Gerald Lee Bickle, Gerald.L.Bickle(at)raytheon.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: 3.Package, Component, Component Implementation Description elements, etc. have no informational attributes such as description, author, title, version. Why were these attributes left out at the PIM level? Recommendation is to add these elements to PIM and PSM Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: June 18, 2003: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Subject: Deployment Issues To: issues@omg.org Cc: deployment-ftf@omg.org, swradio@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.8 June 18, 2001 From: Gerald_L_Bickle@raytheon.com Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 08:35:48 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on NotesServer3/HDC(Release 5.0.12 |February 13, 2003) at 06/18/2003 08:38:39 AM X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id h5IDjfkM021179 Initial Deployment Issues: 3.Package, Component, Component Implementation Description elements, etc. have no informational attributes such as description, author, title, version. Why were these attributes left out at the PIM level? Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 09:51:58 -0500 From: James Kulp Organization: Mercury Computer Systems, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en,pdf To: deployment-ftf@omg.org Subject: Proposed solution to issue 5967 for discussion Using the same "work product" rule that is used to define which classes deserve a "UUID" attribute, add a "informationalProperty" association to the same classes, in the PIM, to allow a set of informational properties to such classes. Specific vocabulary can be defined in a PSM. This allows two things: both a defined set of such properties as well as an extension mechanism to allow vendors or users to attach their own such properties. Property names would follow the standard OMG mechanism for name scoping, as in FTCORBA (e.g. org.omg.ft.ReplicationStyle). Subject: Proposed resolution to issue 5967 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 14:46:27 -0500 Thread-Topic: Proposed solution to issue 5967 for discussion Thread-Index: AcOjrLwHFasFzn+DR1mYYC4cFPuj/gA0Jn0A From: "Pilhofer, Frank" To: X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id hA6KkLNA006642 This is an elaboration on the proposal that Jim sent yesterday. The issue is that our model does not allow to attach informational attributes to model elements, such as information about the author or the license. These are attributes that may be useful during development or distribution, but are not relevant to planning or deployment. The proposed resolution is to add informational properties to all toplevel elements, i.e. ComponentPackageDescription, ComponentImple- mentationDescription, ComponentInterfaceDescription and Implemen- tationArtifactDescription. Proposed resolution: In section 6.3, "Model Diagram Conventions," after introducing standard attributes, add the following paragraph: Several classes contain a set of informational properties. These properties can be used by tools to annotate model elements with non-functional information (e.g. authorship, license, digital signature). The names of informational properties shall be valid URIs. PSMs may define a set of well-known informational properties (by identifying their URI and a corresponding property type). In section 6.4.3 (ComponentPackageDescription), 6.4.5 (Component- ImplementationDescription), 6.4.15 (ImplementationArtifactDescrip- tion), 6.4.16 (ComponentInterfaceDescription), 6.6.1 (Domain) and 6.8.1 (DeploymentPlan), add the following association to each class: Recommendation is to add these elements to PIM and PSM