Legacy Issue Number: 19522
Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Mr. Edward J. Barkmeyer)
The first statement in Annex A.4.2.3 is misleading:
A definition given for a verb concept is an expression that can be substituted for a simple statement expressed using a verb
concept wording of the verb concept.
Unlike a noun concept definition, the definition of a verb concept cannot simply be substituted for an occurrence of the verb concept wording. Like the verb concept wording itself, it is a structured pattern with placeholder parameters, and the substitution process is complex. In “substituting the definition expression for a simple statement expressed using the verb concept wording”, it is also necessary to substitute the role phrases that are used in the verb concept wording in that simple statement for the corresponding placeholders in the definition. That is significantly different from what happens in the noun concept case.
In the same subclause, the sentence:
“A definition of a verb concept can generally be read using the pattern below ...
A fact that ... is a fact that ...”
is not quite general enough. The definition characterizes the same state of affairs, even when it is not a fact. It could be written:
A state of affairs in which ... is a state of affairs in which ...
Reported: SBVR 1.1 — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 04:00 GMT
Disposition: Deferred — SBVR 1.4b2
Deferred to SBVR v1.5 Revision Task Force because the SBVR v1.4 RTF was requested to close before it was finished so the SBVR RTF could be convert to JIRA.
Updated: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:51 GMT