A step towards TMDM 3.0 TMRA 2008 Open Space Session Bock, Barta, Baldauf, Maicher

Removal of Variants Technically not neccessary: Variants can be mapped to names and occurrences bijectively Nobody uses them anyway (Except the Ilmenau guys  ) Did you? Most implementors don‘t implement them Not accessible via TMQL anyway Hard to teach See ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34N0705 http://www1.y12.doe.gov/capabilities/sgml/sc34/document/0705.htm They are just a relict from times when names were not typed

Technically not neccessary:

Variants can be mapped to names and occurrences bijectively

Nobody uses them anyway

(Except the Ilmenau guys  )

Did you?

Most implementors don‘t implement them

Not accessible via TMQL anyway

Hard to teach

See ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34N0705

http://www1.y12.doe.gov/capabilities/sgml/sc34/document/0705.htm

They are just a relict from times when names were not typed

Names and Occurrences Names should be special Occurrences Simplifies TMRM mapping It‘s more aligned with TMQL OR: Unify them and call the new thing „Characteristic“ It‘s called C. in TMQL

Names should be special Occurrences

Simplifies TMRM mapping

It‘s more aligned with TMQL

OR: Unify them and call the new thing „Characteristic“

It‘s called C. in TMQL

Reifiable Association Occurrence Name

Reifiable Association Occurrence Name

Reifiable Association Characteristic

Reification We need two types of reification: Reification „r0“ of the subject of the statement Reification „r1“ of the assertion itself There is a third type, but we don’t need it (do we?)

We need two types of reification:

Reification „r0“ of the subject of the statement

Reification „r1“ of the assertion itself

There is a third type, but we don’t need it (do we?)

Scope Clarify Scoping (AND vs. OR) Maybe allow both somehow? Could be done: Scope not as a set of topics but a scope-object (some implementations do that) Or: a set of sets - Prefer DNF or CNF? (better not...) AND, OR, IMPLICATION, NEGATION… OR: ditch it 

Clarify Scoping (AND vs. OR)

Maybe allow both somehow?

Could be done: Scope not as a set of topics but a scope-object (some implementations do that)

Or: a set of sets - Prefer DNF or CNF? (better not...)

AND, OR, IMPLICATION, NEGATION…

OR: ditch it 

Time and Units Statements should have a time interval in which they are valid Does scoping work here? Is it practicable? Engine-support? assoc(a:b) @[since: 2008-09-12 upto: 2008-12-24] Values need support for units empty => dimensionless

Statements should have a time interval in which they are valid

Does scoping work here?

Is it practicable?

Engine-support?

assoc(a:b) @[since: 2008-09-12 upto: 2008-12-24]

Values need support for units

empty => dimensionless

Support for lists Maybe some (sorted) container principle Could also serve for hierarchies Would help for LINQ, etc.

Maybe some (sorted) container principle

Could also serve for hierarchies

Would help for LINQ, etc.

Further Ideas Clarify difference between Item Identifiers and Subject Identifiers Make SI/SL/II special Occurrences???

Clarify difference between Item Identifiers and Subject Identifiers

Make SI/SL/II special Occurrences???

Thanks Comments? Questions?

Post scriptum This is no formal proposal! You disagree with everything? Fine, let‘s start a dialogue Because that‘s our intention 

This is no formal proposal!

You disagree with everything?

Fine, let‘s start a dialogue

Because that‘s our intention 