User Tools

Site Tools


mvf:compliance_points

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
mvf:compliance_points [2017/06/07 19:52]
ebarkmeyer_thematix.com
mvf:compliance_points [2017/06/12 21:30] (current)
ebarkmeyer_thematix.com [Discussion of view and compliance structure] added Fred's "evolution" writeup
Line 35: Line 35:
 ===== Discussion of view and compliance structure ===== ===== Discussion of view and compliance structure =====
  
-[fac] My point is to recognize these levels ​of evolution ​[sic] as corresponding ​to the evolution ​of the market ​and thus the business opportunities ​for language implementers ​and vocabulary developers.+[fac] The development of vocabularies should go through a process ​of evolution ​starting with 
 +  - individual enterprises that need to share models ​of a single modeling language with activities that prefer different natural languages,  
 +  - possibly expanding to concepts ​and vocabularies across different modeling languages for the same enterprise,  
 +  - development of concepts and vocabularies developed by professional groups ​for specific business domains, ​and  
 +  - development of integrated, concept supersets and associated vocabularies developed by an interdisciplinary,​ business standards organization 
  
-[ejb] These compliance points are what the tool can or cannot do as a system component. ​ MVF is not a modeling language standard with “levels of compliance” as ever larger sets of modeling capabilities. ​ It is a standard for making a system by linking two previously unrelated capability sets.  Modeling tools and vocabulary tools can do entirely different things and still conform by importing and exporting MVF vocabularies,​ but only modeling tools can import and export linked models. ​ Only a vocabulary management tool can support ​[service interfaces],​ and only a modeling tool has any reason to support [MVCLI]. ​ A modeling tool that moonlights as a vocabulary management tool can do it all, but may choose to support only [MODEL1] and [VOCAB1]. ​ But whether it can do it all or not, I may restrict its role in my system to ‘xxx modeling tool’. ​ These compliance points enable roles.  ​There may also be compliance ​points that represent levels of capability in each role, but that is about details of support.+[fac] Each level of evolution will be driven by different business values and increasing levels of effort and collaboration. ​ MVF should support this evolution without increasing the cost and level of collaboration beyond that required at each level of evolution. ​ This might be addressed by different levels of compliance. ​ MVF must recognize these levels of evolution as corresponding to the evolution of the market and thus the business opportunities for language implementers and vocabulary developers. 
 + 
 +[ejb] Fred's view seems to be that only a modeling tool will comply with MVF, and he describes the evolution of the market for modeling tools that act as vocabulary managers. ​ This ignores the fact that formal industry vocabularies and vocabulary management tools already exist in the enterprise marketplace. 
 + 
 +[ejb] These compliance points are what the tool can or cannot do as a system component. ​ MVF is not a modeling language standard with “levels of compliance” as ever larger sets of modeling capabilities. ​ It is a standard for making a system by linking two previously unrelated capability sets.  Modeling tools and vocabulary tools can do entirely different things and still conform by importing and exporting MVF vocabularies,​ but only modeling tools can import and export linked models. ​ Only a vocabulary management tool can support service interfaces ​[MVSCx], and only a modeling tool has any reason to support [MVCLI]. ​ A modeling tool that moonlights as a vocabulary management tool can do it all, but may choose to support only [MODEL1] and [VOCAB1]. ​ But whether it can do it all or not, I may restrict its role in my system to ‘xxx modeling tool’. ​ These compliance points enable roles.  ​The compliance ​levels below represent levels of capability in each role, but that is about details of support ​for the role.
  
 Recommendations for changes to structure? Recommendations for changes to structure?
mvf/compliance_points.txt · Last modified: 2017/06/12 21:30 by ebarkmeyer_thematix.com