-
Key: BACM11-78
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Mr. James Rhyne)
-
Summary:
CapabilityImplementation can aggregate Performers, but this is abstract and used for planning. It should be possible to designate a Performer/OrgUnit as an implementation (actual or planned) for a CapabilityImplementation.
-
Reported: BACM 1.0b2 — Wed, 4 Sep 2024 22:14 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — BACM 1.1b1
-
Disposition Summary:
Create staffs shortcut
Create a staffs shortcut association between CapabilityImplementation and OrgUnit to represent that the OrgUnit provides Performers and AbstractBusinessObjects to staff the CapabilityImplementation.
Replace the assignTo_3 shortcut association with an aggregates_3 association that collects Roles in the CapabilityImplementation.
Change the implements_5 and implements_6 relationships to class associations from shortcuts.
The net of these changes is that CapabilityImplementation is now a collection of Roles and possibly Performers and AbstractBusinesssObjects. The Roles aggregated by a CapabilityImplementation should be Roles ofCapability for the Capability implement_5 by the CapabilityImplementation, but this is not enforced by the abstract syntax. The CapabilityImplementation may aggregate additional Roles that are presumably defined by a CapabilityBehavior variant of the Capability.
For AbstractProcess that is implements_6 by a CapabilityImplementation, the Roles aggregated by the CapabilityImplementation should be exactly the Roles ofProcess of the AbstractProcess. This is not enforced by the abstract syntax. -
Updated: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 13:38 GMT
-
Attachments:
- CapabilityImplementation_example_20240910.docx 495 kB (application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document)
- Roles_BACM11-84_20240912.png 34 kB (image/png)
- Roles_original.png 26 kB (image/png)
BACM11 — No implements relationship between CapabilityImplementation and Performer
- Key: BACM11-78
- OMG Task Force: Business Architecture Core Metamodel (BACM) 1.1 RTF