Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

IM-003 Data model negotiation #26

Closed
jimsch opened this issue Apr 11, 2015 · 9 comments
Closed

IM-003 Data model negotiation #26

jimsch opened this issue Apr 11, 2015 · 9 comments

Comments

@jimsch
Copy link
Contributor

jimsch commented Apr 11, 2015

Version -04

Why should an IM care about this? It makes more sense that this would be an architectural requirement along the lines of:

ARCH-????: Data model negotiation: SACM's Architecture MUST allow for the support of multiple data models for any given Information Model. There MUST be support for a consumer to determine what Data Models exist within a deployment that support a given Information Model.

@ncamwing
Copy link
Contributor

ncamwing commented May 4, 2015

Hi Jim,
Ah, I think I distinguish the definitions of the interfaces that allow the "components" in the architecture to be part of the information model requirements. That is, "architecture" describes the functional components and the responsibilities of the components but how they interface to be part of the information model.
Given that definition, I'm not sure I would put it in architecture but leave it as part of the info model....

Again, believing that SACM defines one single "SACM information model"....

Nancy.

@llorenzin
Copy link

I fall with Nancy on this one, fwiw. High-level roles and capabilities of the components goes in architecture, operations goes in information model, and this is a requirement against the operations.

@jimsch
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimsch commented May 8, 2015

My problem with this is that if it is a requirement on the IM. I have a tendency to consider it to be an attribute that must be defined in the IM that can then be queried. Putting into the architecture makes me think of it in terms of an operation that can be done independent of IMs and DMs.

@ncamwing
Copy link
Contributor

ncamwing commented May 9, 2015

Hmmm....so I think it may be needed for both the interfaces and the data structures? e.g. IM and operations of data model?

@jimsch
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimsch commented May 9, 2015

That would probably be clearer.

@ncamwing
Copy link
Contributor

ncamwing commented May 9, 2015

I've updated the IM-003 sentence to read:
SACM's Information Model MUST allow support for different data models, data model versions and different versions of the operations (and network layer transport).

in -05....

@jimsch
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimsch commented May 14, 2015

Version -05
The last sentence is missing some words in it. /of a particular or/of a particular data model or/

@ncamwing
Copy link
Contributor

Updated in -06.

@jimsch
Copy link
Contributor Author

jimsch commented May 27, 2015

Fixed in -06

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants