-
Key: SBVR-104
-
Legacy Issue Number: 9957
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Rule ML Initiative ( Mr. Donald R. Chapin)
-
Summary:
ISSUE: Current SBVR Conformaance Clause Does Not Meet the Criteria for an OMG Specification The Conformance clause needs to be specified according to the follwoing rules from the OMG Specification tremplate: "The Conformance clause identifies which clauses of the specification are mandatory (or conditionally mandatory) and which are optional in order for an implementation to claim conformance to the specification. For conditionally mandatory clauses, the conditions must, of course, be specified. One side effect of this is that the clause numbering must be sufficiently fine grain to make it easy to distinguish between mandatory and optional clauses. It is for the writers of the specification to determine what material should be mandatory, conditionally mandatory, or optional for conformance. This is not easy. One way of summarising the difficulty is that it is probably impossible to define conformance such that the set of all conformant implementations is the same as the set of all useful implementations. However, you must try to ensure your conformance requirements means that all useful implementations are conformant, not that all conformant implementations are a subset of all useful implementations."
-
Reported: SBVR 1.0b1 — Mon, 24 Jul 2006 04:00 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — SBVR 1.0b2
-
Disposition Summary:
Revise the conformance clause to specify conformance of a document, conformance of a tool that creates a document, and conformance of a tool that processes a document.
-
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT