[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [mdt-sbvr.dev] Re: The kernel of SBVRwithout programmingconsiderations 2008-05-31-2112
|
Mark,
Yes, that is the key phrase: propositions ABOUT any of these things, but
declarations of the things themselves. I don't see any use of fact in
clause 13.6 examples, but assume it would look something like this:
<sbvr:term xmi:id="exampleTerm" signifier="et-s" meaning="meaning"/>
<sbvr:fact xmi:id="fact-1"/>
<sbvr:thing1IsThing2 thing1="fact-1" thing2="exampleTerm"/>
<sbvr:factModel xmi:id="factModel-1"/>
<sbvr:factModelIncludesFact factModel="factModel-1" fact="fact-1"/>
So the fact model does not include the term, but it includes a fact about
the term.
The SBVR metamodel and the SBVR.xsd normative schema for document exchange
would prohibit use of:
<sbvr:factModelIncludesFact factModel="factModel-1" fact="exampleTerm"/>
>
> As I understand it, a fact model can contain propositions
> about any of the kinds of things you list. For example, a
> fact model can contain facts such
> as:
>
> * There exists a concept "person"
> * The text "person" represents the concept "person"
> * There exists a namespace "xyz"
> * The designation "person" is in the namespace "xyz"
>
> ... and so forth. Clause 13 uses this method.
>
> So I withdraw my statement that "does not include
> representations or expressions" because I believe you can
> state facts about representations and expressions. I believe
> the other limitations that I list still apply.
>
> Note that clause 13.2.1 says that "Each [UML] package is a
> MOF-based reflection of one of SBVR's vocabulary namespaces."