-
Key: RMS-55
-
Legacy Issue Number: 15114
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Object Management Group ( Larry Johnson [X] (Inactive))
-
Summary:
We currently attach RecordKeeper to ManagedRecord, but this was established before we discovered the need to manage record disposition through RecordSet. Is there a case wherein records in a RecordSet have different RecordKeeper's?
-
Reported: RMS 1.0b1 — Thu, 4 Mar 2010 05:00 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — RMS 1.0b2
-
Disposition Summary:
Delete association between ManagedRecord and RecordKeeper. Establish association between RecordSet and RecordKeeper.
Provide constraint that RecordSet's cannot be merged in less they have identical RecordKeeper history.
Added constraint to RecordSet: “RecordSets cannot be merged unless they have the same RecordKeeper”. This is probably also a constraint on the DispositionInstructions service.
There is an undesirable direction of dependencies. Split the Role subtypes out of the Party package into an RmsRoles package that extends the Party package. -
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT
RMS — RecordKeeper is related to ManagedRecord. Shouldn't it be to RecordSet?
- Key: RMS-55
- OMG Task Force: Records Management Services (RMS) FTF