Issues for Mailing list of the Second Property and Casualty Information Model 1.0 Finalization Task Force
To comment on any of these issues, send email to p_c-ftf@omg.org. (Please include the issue number in the Subject: header, thusly: [Issue ###].) To submit a new issue, send email to issues@omg.org.
List of issues (green=resolved, yellow=pending Board vote, red=unresolved)
Issue 17567: Physical Data Model
Issue 17568: Dimensional Data Model
Issue 17569: Glossary Mapping to Model Terms
Issue 17570: International Model
Issue 17567: Physical Data Model (p_c-ftf)
Click here for this issue's archive.
Click here for this issue's attachments.
Source: LiquidHub (Mr. Tom Ford, tom.ford(at)liquidhub.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary:
Submission does not include a physical data model, which has been suggested by several people in our review group as something that would be a good addition.
Resolution: The P&C Work Group created and published a DDL to support the creation of a physical data model. This file will be included as a new machine consumable file in the submission.
Revised Text: Realistically the ability to outline every change made to
For the Physical Data Model, the following updates and changes were made to the submission document:
1. New diagrams were added to the ERwin Data Model.
a. Each Subject Area now has a physical “stored display” that shows:
1) Table Names
2) Column Names
3) Physical Data Types
4) Key and Foreign Key designations
5) Cardinality without relationship verbs
2. The physical data types were defined for the SQL Server Database.
Note – the Physical Data Model can be used to generate other databases by creating another version and aligning the data types to the type of database
3. The physical table and column names were generated based on the Logical Data Model names with an underscore (_) added between words.
Note – the Physical Data Model can be used to generate other databases by creating another version and using standard abbreviations for the table and column names, as databases other than SQL Server do not usually provide for longer business names.
4. The following entity and table names were changed because the database table generation rejected a couple of table names that were considered “reserved words” in the DBMS:
a. Group was changed to Grouping.
b. Authorization was changed to Approval.
5. The “Role” details in the Logical Data Model” were not continued into the Physical Data Model.
These were in the Logical Data Model to provide examples of the kinds of “roles” that could apply to the various major party relationships and were not intended to become physical constructs.
6. The Attribute (and associated Column) “Parent Claim Identifier” (Column “Parent_Claim_Identifier”) was added to the Claim Entity (and associated Table).
The physical table generation exposed this omitted attribute in the Logical Data Model and so this was added to the Logical and Physical Data Models.
7. These Physical models have been embedded in the specification directly following the Logical models in the following sections of the document:
a. 3.1.2 – Party Subject Area
b. 3.1.3 – Account and Agreement Subject Area
c. 3.1.4 – Policy Subject Area Model
d. 3.1.5 – Claim Subject Area Model
e. 3.1.6 – Assessment Subject Area Model
f. 3.1.7 – Agreement Subject Area Model
g. 3.1.8 – Claim Role Subject Area Model
h. 3.1.9 – Staffing Role Subject Area Model
i. 3.1.10 – Party Subtype Subject Area Model
j. 3.1.11 – Insurable Object Subtype Area Model
k. 3.1.12 – Money Subtype Area Model
l. 3.1.13 – Event Subtype Subject Area Model
m. 3.1.14 – Product Coverage Reference Subject Area Model
Actions taken:
August 27, 2012: received issue
Issue 17568: Dimensional Data Model (p_c-ftf)
Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: LiquidHub (Mr. Tom Ford, tom.ford(at)liquidhub.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary: Submission does not include a data model - this was identified as an "optional" deliverable in the RFP.
Resolution: This items was explicitly defined as an "optional" item. At this time the P&C Work Group has decided not to pursue the creation of the dimensional model.
Disposition: Closed, out of scope
Revised Text:
Actions taken:
August 27, 2012: received issue
Issue 17569: Glossary Mapping to Model Terms (p_c-ftf)
Click here for this issue's archive.
Click here for this issue's attachments.
Source: LiquidHub (Mr. Tom Ford, tom.ford(at)liquidhub.com)
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
Summary: The OMG AB requested a report of alignment between the Glossary and the Model
Resolution: The P&C Work Group performed a series of compares between the Business Glossary and Data Model, making changes where appropriate to ensure that they are consistent
Revised Text: To address the alignment of the Data Model Objects to the Glossary, extensive analysis was done to assure that there is more consistency and rationale for the terms and definitions used in, or supporting, the Data Model. Many minor editorial changes were made, many definitions were enhanced, some terms were added, and some unneeded terms were deleted. Detailed and summary lists of these changes are in a supporting document.
1. These changes had very little impact on the structure or content of the Data Model. A couple of exceptions to this are:
a. The subtypes of Claim Amount in the “Money” Subject Area were adjusted to reflect the improved Glossary updates and to add clarity to the types of claim monies that apply:
? The major subtypes of Claim Amount were changed to Claim Payment, Claim Reserve, and Recovery (these were Claim Payment, Claim Expense, Claim Reserve, and Recovery).
? The above subtype of Claim Payment was subtyped into Loss Payment and Expense Payment.
? The above subtype of Claim Reserve was subtyped into Loss Reserve and Expense Reserve.
? The above subtype of Recovery has two added subtypes: Loss Recovery and Expense Recovery.
2. The following table format changes were made to accommodate these required updates:
a. 3.2.1 Subject Area Definitions – the only changes made in this section were minor wording changes to some of the definitions, punctuation, etc. that were identified during the model/glossary compare.
b. 3.2.2 Entity Definitions - the only changes made in this section were minor wording changes to some of the definitions, punctuation, etc. that were identified during the model/glossary compare.
c. 3.2.3 Attribute Definitions
? Column 2, previously Attribute Definition, is now Column Name. This is a more logic organization of this information.
? Column 3, previously Domain Name, is now Attribute Definition.
? Column 3 content has minor wording changes to some of the definitions, punctuation, etc. that were identified during the model/glossary compare.
d. 3.2.4 Relationship Definitions
? Added new column called “Relationship Null Option” to track where there are specific null requirements in the model.
? Changes made throughout table to address consistency issues in the previous document
e. 3.2.5 Domain Definitions
? Added new column called Domain Physical Name to capture the relevant information from the Physical Model that has been added.
? All data for this Domain Physical Name is new to this document
f. 3.3.1 Subject Area Entities
? Added Table Name column and content to table
g. 3.3.2 Entity Attributes
? Added Table Name column and content to the table to reflect changes
? Added Column Name column and content to the table to reflect changes
? Added Domain Name column and content to the table to reflect changes
h. 3.4 Business Terms Reference Glossary
? Changes made to table to address inconsistencies identified in the comparision
Please refer to dtc/13-04-05, P&C Data Model Specification (with change notation) for full traceability of the minor changes made during the Finalization Task Force to address entity and attribute level renaming the specification
Actions taken:
August 27, 2012: received issue
Issue 17570: International Model (p_c-ftf)
Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: LiquidHub (Mr. Tom Ford, tom.ford(at)liquidhub.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary: Model should be upgraded for international use
Resolution: This item was explicitly an "out of scope" item for this standard, and at this time it is not planned for future versions of the model.
Disposition: Closed, out of scope
Revised Text:
Actions taken:
August 27, 2012: received issue