ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N 2337

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N 2337"

Stuart Cummings
5 years ago
Views:

1 ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N 2337 Da: REPLACES: ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Data Management and Inrchange Secretariat: Unid Stas of America (ANSI) Adminisr by Farance Inc. on behalf of ANSI DOCUMENT TYPE TITLE SOURCE Summary of Voting/Table of Replies Summary of Voting on 32N2293 ISO/IEC CD Information chnology - Metamodel framework for inroperability (MFI) Part 12: Metamodel for information model registration SC32 Secretariat PROJECT NUMBER STATUS REFERENCES ACTION ID. REQUESTED ACTION DUE DATE WG2 is requesd to resolve the comments. The document obtain substantial support. ACT Number of Pages 10 LANGUAGE USED DISTRIBUTION English P & L Members SC Chair WG Conveners and Secretaries Dr. Timothy Schoechle, Secretary, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Farance Inc *, 3066 Sixth Street, Boulder, CO, Unid Stas of America Telephone: ; Timothy@Schoechle.org available from the JTC 1/SC 32 WebSi *Farance Inc. adminisrs the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Secretariat on behalf of ANSI

2 ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N2337 Summary of Voting on Document SC 32 N 2293 Title: Summary of Voting on 32N2293 ISO/IEC CD Information chnology - Metamodel framework for inroperability (MFI) Part 12: Metamodel for information model registration Project: P Member Approval Approval with Comments Canada 1 China 1 Czech Republic 1 Egypt 1 Disapproval with Comments Absntion with Comments Finland 1 Germany 1 India 1 Japan 1 Korea, Republic of 1 Portugal 1 Russian Feration 1 Unid Kingdom 1 Unid Stas 1 Austria Belgium Total P O Member France 1 Ghana Hungary Indonesia Italy Kazakhstan Netherlands, The Norway Romania Poland Swen Switzerland Total O Dr. Timothy Schoechle, Secretary, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Farance Inc *, 3066 Sixth Street, Boulder, CO, Unid Stas of America Telephone: ; Timothy@Schoechle.org available from the JTC 1/SC 32 WebSi *Farance Inc. adminisrs the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Secretariat on behalf of ANSI

3 COMMENTS: Canada YES. See comments below: Finland ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and inrest. Germany ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and inrest. India ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and inrest. Japan NO. See comments below: Portugal ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and inrest. Unid Kingdom NO. See comments below:

4 Canadian Comments on 32N2293 CD Da: Document: N2293 Project: CD CA 00 CA 01 CA 02 CA 03 CA 04 All All - Ge Canada approves the draft with the following comments. All All - Ge Since the new mpla allows for xt to be referenc using line s, we generad a line version of the xt which is attach at the bottom of this document, and we have referenc those line s in our comments Scope Ed IDEF1X is IEEE Std Add the reference. Canada asks that future ballot xts include line s so that all NBs can reference them No Ed NOTES are suppos to be in 9pt font. Make the change here and to all other NOTES. All All Te If any further problems are discover before or during the Comment Resolution Meeting, and a consensus can be reach on a solution, then they should be correcd. [Use the No Style from the STD mpla.] To be dermin at the CRM as requir. END 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial ISO/IEC electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 1 of 1

5 ISO/IEC CD Metamodel for information model registration Da: 2013/4/12 Document: 32N2293T Project: MFI-12 (e.g. 17) (e.g. Table 1) Scope "'universe of discourse" should be a domain of inrest. Since ISO/IEC Common Logic defines "universe of discourse" very specifically in contrast to "universe of reference", WG2 generally agre that "a domain of inrest" should be us, insad of "universe of discourse" when it is us in a general sense. 6 1 Scope "These are ofn referr to as logical models." Should be remov because; 10 from the bottom As a scope, this sennce is not necessary. The meanings of logical model and conceptual model vary, depending on persons who use them and they are confusing. 1 Scope "at the logical level" should be remov, because its meaning is not clear from the bottom 1 Scope "at the conceptual level" should be remov, because its meaning is not clear describ domain describ domain It should be "non-enumerad domain", rather than "describ domain", if it is necessary Bas on this definition, a continuous domain such as real is not a describ domain, since a set of all real can be defin explicit ly. 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial ISO/IEC/CEN/CENELEC electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 1 of 5

6 ISO/IEC CD Metamodel for information model registration Da: 2013/4/12 Document: 32N2293T Project: MFI-12 (e.g. 17) (e.g. Table 1) enumerad domain Bas on this definition, a set of all real s can be enumerad domain, which is not discre and strange in an intuitive sense of "enumerad". Even if it is infini, it can be an enumerad domain as far as it is countably (enumeradly) in fini? Isn't is enough to simply adopt "enumerad value domain" from MDR? information model element NOTE Base on the definition of entity type(4.2.16), it cannot be an information model element, because it is not graphical nor xtual representation Structure of MFI Information model registration The abbreviad rm "MFI Information model registration" nes to be defin Overview of MFI Information model registration The meaning of "appropria" in " This model is also appropria for database structures that conform to the SQL Core specification." nes to be clarifi. This metamodel can be us for regisring database structure specifications that conform to the SQL Core specification Overview of MFI Information model registration Figure1 The bottom raw of each rectangle should be remov, because no operations are specifi. 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial ISO/IEC/CEN/CENELEC electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 2 of 5

7 ISO/IEC CD Metamodel for information model registration Da: 2013/4/12 Document: 32N2293T Project: MFI-12 (e.g. 17) (e.g. Table 1) 12 Afr 5.1 Overview of MFI Information model registration Sub clause"5.2 Association between MFI Information model registration and MFI Core and mapping " and a relevant figure should be inserd Detail provid in each metaclass definition This sub clause is not necessary, because almost everything except alrnative names (Aliases) are specifi in MFI 10. As a standard, aliases are not necessary. If aliases are specifi, its conformance is not clear. To claim a conformance, is it necessary to support all aliases, or is it enough to support either a name or one of aliases? Attribu Superclass Model_Elem ent "(defin in MFI Core and mapping)" should be "(from MFI Core and mapping)" to be consisnt with other parts of MFI and MDR Attribu Attribu Subclasses It should be remov. Aliases Intuitively saying, a SQL column can be an attribu, but an attribu are not necessarily a SQL column. So, SQL_Column is not appropria as an alias for Attribu. Also, SQL_Schema at Diagram, SQL_Data_Type at Domain, SQL_Table at Entity_Type are strange for aliases. Generally speaking, no alias is necessary Attribu and all other metaclasses Attribu Name It should not be in oblique style.. 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial ISO/IEC/CEN/CENELEC electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 3 of 5

8 ISO/IEC CD Metamodel for information model registration Da: 2013/4/12 Document: 32N2293T Project: MFI-12 (e.g. 17) (e.g. Table 1) Attribu and all other metaclasses Attribu Name The meaning of "unique" is unclear. At least, there are two possibilities. One is globally unique, and the other is unique in this metacalass. If the former, it makes little sense without specifying the mechanism that guaranes global uniqueness. If the latr, it should be clearly stad at Constraints, something like "The value of the attribu Name has to be unique in this metaclass." Diagram Refrence entity_type_ model_elem ent "The set of entity types..."should be "The entity types", because usually it is inrpr as there can be many (*) sets of entity types. This comment is applicable to all the references whose maximum cardinality is * Annex A Figure 2 It should be Figure A.1 to be consisnt with ISO_IEC_Directives Part_2. Similar comments are applicable to all figures and tables in Annex. 2 Annex A The following sennce is not true because Name and Conxt are defin in this standard and MDR does not have attribus nam Name nor Conxt. 22 C.2 Example tables It should be D.2 Examples 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial ISO/IEC/CEN/CENELEC electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 4 of 5

9 ISO/IEC CD Metamodel for information model registration Da: 2013/4/12 Document: 32N2293T Project: MFI-12 (e.g. 17) (e.g. Table 1) 23 C.2 Example tables This Relational DBMS implementation does not conform to this part, because this implementation does not support references of both directions. Examples should be the one that conforms to this part. 24 Annex E (informative) Bibliography It should be just Bibliography because Bibliography is Bibliography and is not Annex. 25 Annex E (informative) Bibliography Each reference should be with [ ]. 26 Annex E (informative) Bibliography "Bruce, T.A. (1992) Designing Quality Databases with IDEF1X Information Models. Dorset House Feral Information" should be replac by "Processing Standards Publication 184 Announcing the Standard for INTEGRATION DEFINITION FOR INFORMATION MODELING (IDEF1X), December 1993" 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial ISO/IEC/CEN/CENELEC electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 5 of 5

10 Templa for comments and observations Da: 2 April 2013 Document: ISO/IEC CD (3) 4 5 (6) (7) MB 1 Clause No./ No./ Annex No (e.g. Table 1) Type of comment 2 Comment (justification for change) by the MB Propos change by the MB Secretariat observations on each comment submitd GB The definition is too 'physical' Amend to read: "component of a table (4.2.34) that is a collection of values all of the same defin data type (4.2.7)" GB The definition confuses real world and modelling concepts. Amend to read: "'property of an information model element (4.2.20) that is a stament explaining the significance of this information model element (4.2.20) to the business and or organisation that is the subject of this information model (4.2.19)" GB The definition should be compatible with that for column. Amend to read: "sequence of values in a table (4.2.34), one for each column (4.2.6) of the table (4.2.34)" GB 04 Annex D The format of the examples is inconsisnt with the format in other parts of Amend format of the examples to the 'object format' us in other parts of MB = Member body (enr the ISO 3166 two-letr country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS iting unit are identifi by **) 2 comment: ge = general = chnical = itorial NOTE Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory. ISO electronic balloting commenting mpla/version page 1 of 1

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N 2340

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N 2340 Da: 2013-04-29 REPLACES: ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Data Management and Inrchange Secretariat: Unit Stas of America (ANSI) Adminisr by Farance Inc. on behalf of ANSI DOCUMENT TYPE TITLE