SACM 1.1 RTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

SACM11 — Usage of Specializations of Claim

Open Closed All
  • Key: SACM11-14
  • Legacy Issue Number: 16517
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: MITRE ( Mr. Samuel Redwine)
  • Summary:

    May a specialization of Claim element appear anywhere a Claim may? and vice versa? In June Day 2 diagram allows Calims in Augumentation elements but not InformationElements. However, InformationAssertions can appear both places. What is the reasoning behind this?

    One might consider questions such as: For example, do restrictions exist on where an InformationAssertion may appear? Why should not a Claim element be used in place of each of the kinds or elements that inherit from it (e.g. in 2011 June Day 2)?

  • Reported: ARM 1.0b1 — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Closed; No Change — SACM 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    May a specialization of Claim element appear anywhere a Claim may? and vice versa? In June Day 2 diagram allows Claims in Augumentation elements but not InformationElements. InformationAssertions can appear both places. What is the reasoning behind this?

    This issue has gone away because of the resolution to Issue 16838 (SR-24) that has now removed EvidenceAssertion as a specialization of Claim.

  • Updated: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 01:16 GMT