 |
Page History
| Wiki Markup |
|---|
{scrollbar:icons=false}
|
Link
...
to
...
page:
...
...
...
...
| Table of Contents |
|---|
Comment 05 on Section 5.1
...
Section
...
5
...
>
...
Artifact
...
Management
...
>
...
Types
...
of
...
Artifacts
...
>
...
Static
...
Models
...
November
...
22
...
version
...
This
...
section
...
has
...
many
...
problems.
...
HL7
...
MIF,
...
UML
...
and
...
11179
...
are
...
not
...
Information
...
models.
...
They
...
are
...
metamodels.
...
That
...
is,
...
they
...
provide
...
a
...
vocabulary
...
for
...
expressing
...
other
...
models.
...
HL7
...
RIM,
...
BRIDG,
...
and
...
LS-DAM
...
are
...
not
...
metamodels.
...
Instead,
...
they
...
can
...
(with
...
proper
...
transformation
...
to
...
formal
...
representation)
...
be
...
used
...
as
...
upper
...
ontologies
...
which
...
constrain
...
the
...
semantics
...
of
...
lower-level
...
ontologies.
...
OWL
...
and
...
RDF
...
are
...
knowledge
...
representation
...
languages.
...
They
...
both
...
have
...
multiple
...
serializations
...
(syntactic
...
models).
...
RESOLUTON:
...
Agree.
...
The
...
language
...
in
...
the
...
section
...
is
...
misleading.
...
The
...
intent
...
was
...
to
...
communicate
...
any
...
model
...
or
...
schema
...
can
...
be
...
stored
...
in
...
the
...
registry.
...
Irrespective
...
of
...
representation
...
and
...
level
...
of
...
abstraction.
...
Raghu
...
Chintalapati
...
Comment
...
04
...
on
...
Section
...
5.1
...
Section
...
5
...
>
...
Artifact
...
Management
...
>
...
Types
...
of
...
Artifacts
...
>
...
Behavioral
...
Models
...
November
...
22
...
version
...
One
...
has
...
to
...
be
...
careful
...
here
...
what
...
to
...
call
...
the
...
"behavior
...
of
...
services".
...
As
...
indicated
...
in,
...
e.g.,
...
the
...
HL7
...
Behavioral
...
Framework
...
(by
...
John
...
Koisch),
...
behavior
...
is
...
"A
...
collection
...
of
...
interactions
...
with
...
a
...
set
...
of
...
constraints
...
on
...
when
...
they
...
can
...
occur
...
in
...
a
...
given
...
Working
...
Interoperability
...
/business
...
process
...
context".
...
In
...
other
...
words
...
writing
...
something
...
like
...
"Behavior
...
of
...
services
...
provides
...
an
...
unambiguous
...
definition
...
of
...
the
...
service
...
constraints,
...
capabilities,
...
dependencies,
...
and
...
interactions"
...
is
...
vague
...
and
...
probably
...
not
...
in-line
...
with
...
the
...
SAIF.
...
For
...
example,
...
capabilities
...
of
...
services
...
indicate
...
what
...
the
...
service
...
does,
...
not
...
how
...
it
...
does
...
it
...
(the
...
behavior).
...
RESOLUTON:
...
Document
...
updated
...
to
...
reflect
...
comment.
...
Charlie
...
Mead
...
Comment
...
03
...
on
...
Section
...
5.1
...
Comment
...
on
...
November
...
22
...
version
...
Listing
...
"Orchestration
...
and
...
Workflows",
...
as
...
well
...
as
...
"Business
...
Rules"
...
under
...
Dynamic
...
Models
...
is
...
too
...
vague
...
compared
...
to
...
the
...
approach
...
under
...
static
...
models
...
where
...
technologies
...
such
...
as
...
OWL
...
etc
...
are
...
explicitly
...
mentioned.
...
What
...
kind
...
of
...
Business
...
Rules,
...
what
...
kind
...
of
...
orchestration
...
and
...
workflows?
...
What
...
are
...
the
...
technologies?
...
RESOLUTION:
...
Edited
...
to
...
reflect
...
the
...
comment.
...
Charlie
...
Mead
...
Comment
...
02
...
on
...
Section
...
5.1
...
Section
...
5
...
>
...
Artifact
...
Management
...
>
...
Types
...
of
...
Artifacts
...
>
...
Content
...
November
...
22
...
version
...
Content
...
is
...
a
...
vague
...
term,
...
everything
...
is
...
content.
...
In
...
particular
...
one
...
should
...
not
...
define
...
it
...
as
...
"Content
...
includes
...
all
...
unstructured
...
text
...
and
...
other
...
forms
...
of
...
content...".
...
This
...
is
...
circular.
...
The
...
"Content"
...
paragraph
...
suffers
...
from
...
vagueness.
...
"Content
...
includes:
...
images
...
and
...
other
...
representations
...
of
...
static
...
content".
...
So,
...
content
...
is
...
also
...
static
...
models?
...
RESOLUTION:
...
The
...
intent
...
of
...
the
...
section
...
was
...
to
...
communicate
...
that
...
service
...
specifications
...
contain
...
different
...
artifacts,
...
some
...
of
...
which
...
are
...
unstructured.
...
The
...
unstructured
...
artifacts
...
in
...
a
...
specification
...
could
...
include
...
text,
...
images,
...
etc.
...
For
...
example
...
a
...
service
...
specification
...
might
...
include
...
cmaps
...
(concept
...
maps),
...
which
...
aren't
...
UML
...
models.
...
These
...
cmaps
...
are
...
part
...
of
...
the
...
specification
...
and
...
are
...
important
...
communication
...
tool.
...
Not
...
all
...
artifacts
...
at
...
the
...
conceptual
...
level
...
are
...
computable,
...
and
...
SI
...
is
...
expected
...
to
...
support
...
multiple
...
approaches.
...
Raghu
...
Chintalapati
...
Comment
...
01
...
on
...
Section
...
5.1
...
Section
...
5
...
>
...
Artifact
...
Management
...
>
...
Types
...
of
...
Artifacts
...
>
...
Artifact
...
Management
...
Functions
...
November
...
22
...
version
...
Does
...
managing
...
the
...
lifecycle,
...
governance
...
and
...
versioning
...
of
...
the
...
models,
...
content
...
and
...
forms
...
also
...
include
...
the
...
Specification
...
Content
...
from
...
the
...
previous
...
paragraph?
...
RESOLUTION:
...
Yes.
...
But
...
the
...
ability
...
to
...
validate
...
and
...
govern
...
some
...
of
...
this
...
content
...
will
...
be
...
limited
...
as
...
they
...
are
...
not
...
computable.
...
Raghu Chintalapati
| Wiki Markup |
|---|
Chintalapati
{scrollbar:icons=false} |
