Issues for

To comment on any of these issues, send email to reqif-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)

List options: All ; Open Issues only; or Closed Issues only

Issue 15311: Class descriptions are incomplete
Issue 15435: Associate RelationGroup to source specification and target specification
Issue 15436: Remove Annex B
Issue 15437: XHTML schema import should be more inclusive
Issue 15716: Move Annex A (Mapping Table) to implementation guide
Issue 15717: Remove inconsistency in AttributeValueEnumeration description

Issue 15311: Class descriptions are incomplete (reqif-ftf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary:

According to the diagram on page 39, Specification, SpecObject, SpecRelation and RelationGroup all have an association named "type" to their respecive SpecType.  This association is missing from the corresponding class descriptions in section 10.8.

Resolution: The statement of the issue has been verified, it is true. While the model contains the “type” associations, the specification text does not reflect that. Therefore, a “type” association needs to be added to the class descriptions mentioned in the summary
Revised Text: For clauses 10.8.37 Specification, 10.8.39 SpecObject, 10.8.41 SpecRelation, APPEND the following statements to their “Associations” paragraph: • type : SpecObjectType [1] Linkage to the concrete SpecType instance. For clause 10.8.33 RelationGroup, replace the association “relationGroupType” with the above paragraph to make it consistent with the other associations and the model.
Actions taken:
June 28, 2010: received issue
April 25, 2011: closed issue

Issue 15435: Associate RelationGroup to source specification and target specification (reqif-ftf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: ProSTEP iViP Association (Mr. Bertil Muth, bertil.muth(at)hood-group.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary:

In the RFC, a "RelationGroup" element is associated to "specRelations". 


However, in contrast to prior versions of the Requirements Interchange Format,
the ReqIF RFC does not account for the fact that grouped relations should either link
requirements of two specifications (e.g. Customer Requirements Specification and
System Requirements Specification) or requirements within one specification.


Thus, two associations should be added to "RelationGroup", called "sourceSpecification" and
"targetSpecification" to point out the specifications in which the
source "SpecObject" elements and the target "SpecObject" elements connected by
the "specRelations" are located. 


Note that having these associations in place would also greatly increase performance of ReqIF tool
implementations.


An additional constraint should be added to the RelationGroup section that defines that the "specObject" elements
connected by the "specRelations" must be referenced by a (SpecHierarchy element) of the respective specification.

Resolution: Update the textual description and the diagrams shown in the specification, the machine-readable file reqif.cmof and the XML schema file reqif.xsd to reflect the change as described in the issue. Also, update the textual description of SpecRelationType to clarify the distinction to RelationGroup.
Revised Text: see pages 7 though 8 of OMG document dtc/2010-12-12
Actions taken:
August 27, 2010: received issue
April 25, 2011: closed issue

Issue 15436: Remove Annex B (reqif-ftf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: ProSTEP iViP Association (Mr. Bertil Muth, bertil.muth(at)hood-group.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary:

Remove the non-normative Annex B "Hints for Implementing ReqIF tools",
as it is a legacy artefact from earlier RIF specifications and may be 
contradictory to the contents of the specification.
Factor out implementation specific content in a separate, informative
"Implementation Guide".

Resolution: As the issue says, remove Annex B. Then, include a description pointing to the implementation guide
Revised Text: Because of Issue 15716, the description pointing to the implementation guide becomes part of Annex A (because the prior contents of Annex A are moved to the implementation guide as well – there is only one Annex left). In Annex A: REPLACE the title of Annex A with “Annex A: Implementation Guide”. REPLACE the previous contents of Annex A with the following description: “Additional informative technical descriptions that help to implement a ReqIF capable tool can be found in the ReqIF implementation guide at the following location: http://www.prostep.org/de/downloads/guidelines-use-cases.html”
Actions taken:
August 27, 2010: received issue
April 25, 2011: closed issue

Issue 15437: XHTML schema import should be more inclusive (reqif-ftf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: ProSTEP iViP Association (Mr. Bertil Muth, bertil.muth(at)hood-group.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary:

The way the XHTML schema is imported in the ReqIF XML schema works for some tools (like XML Spy 2010 or Eclipse Web Tools Plattform),
but leads to validation errors in other tools (like Eclipse Standard xsd-validator and Eclipse EMF generator).


There is an easy way to make validation work for all of those tools by incorporating a separate XML schema driver file.
Such a XML schema has been worked out already by supporters/submitter of the specification.

Section 11.4 of the specification needs to be adapted to reflect the new XML schema.

Resolution: As the issue describes, a driver file needs to be created – this is the normative XML schema driver.xsd. Instead of the previous way of importing XML schemas, only the driver file is imported. Additionally, clause 11.4 needs to be adapted to reflect the change
Revised Text: In clause 11.4, EBNF: REPLACE paragraph “1d. XHTMLImports ::= […]” by 1d. XHTMLImports ::= "<xsd:import namespace='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml' schemaLocation='driver.xsd'/>" In XML schema file (reqif.xsd), do the same. Because this creates a new version of the XML schema, the XML target namespace has been changed to “http://www.omg.org/spec/ReqIF/20101201”
Actions taken:
August 27, 2010: received issue
April 25, 2011: closed issue

Issue 15716: Move Annex A (Mapping Table) to implementation guide (reqif-ftf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: ProSTEP iViP Association (Mr. Bertil Muth, bertil.muth(at)hood-group.com)
Nature: Enhancement
Severity: Minor
Summary:

As stated in issue 15436, the implementation specific, informative part of the ReqIF specification should be factored out in a separate implementation guide.

As the mapping table belongs to the implementation specific part, it should become part of the implementation guide as well.

Resolution: Remove the contents of Annex A. Also, all references made to the Annexes in the text need to be updated.
Revised Text: Starting with the sentence “The Annexes contain additional, informative technical descriptions”, REPLACE the remaining text of this clause by this text: “Annex A refers to an informative guideline that contains additional technical hints on implementing ReqIF.” Clause 7.3, “How the Requirements Interchange Format copes with different tool capabilities”: In the first row of the table, column “Consequences”, REPLACE the text “See Annex A for a reference to the mapping table” by “See Annex A for a reference to an implementation guide that provides such a mapping.”
Actions taken:
October 11, 2010: received issue
April 25, 2011: closed issue

Issue 15717: Remove inconsistency in AttributeValueEnumeration description (reqif-ftf)

Click here for this issue's archive.
Source: ProSTEP iViP Association (Mr. Bertil Muth, bertil.muth(at)hood-group.com)
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
Summary:

Section 10.8.15 "AttributeValueEnumeration" states:


"NOTE: The definition association references an AttributeValueEnumeration element [..]"


This is obviously wrong and should read:

"NOTE: The definition association references an AttributeDefinitionEnumeration element [..]"

Resolution: Replace the text as described in the issue.
Revised Text: Replace the text as described in the issue
Actions taken:
October 11, 2010: received issue
April 25, 2011: closed issue