SBVR 1.5 RTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

SBVR15 — Inconsistent use of terminology when relating facts to fact types

  • Key: SBVR15-64
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15124
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Escape Velocity ( Don Baisley)
  • Summary:

    Inconsistent use of terminology when relating facts to fact types

    It has been noted that there are a few places in clause 10 where the relationship between facts and fact types are described using inconsistent language. SBVR makes clear that not every fact is of a particular fact type – obviously, some facts are formulated using quantifiers, logical operators, etc. SBVR makes clear that instances of fact types are actualities, not facts. SBVR describes concepts as having instances, but not facts as having instances. A few places in clause 10 can be lead to confusion in this regard. They are listed below with recommended rewordings.

    Thanks go to Mark Linehan who graciously went through clause 10 last September and located these places.

    Recommended changes:

    1. In the third paragraph of the introduction to clause 10, REMOVE the sentence that says:

    A ‘Fact’ is of a particular ‘Fact Type.’

    2. REPLACE the third paragraph of 10.1.1.2, which says this:

    The conceptual schema declares the fact types (kinds of facts, such as “Employee works for Department”) and rules relevant to the business domain.

    With this:

    The conceptual schema declares the fact types (such as “Employee works for Department”) and rules relevant to the business domain.

    3. In the last paragraph of page 89 (in 10.1.1.2) there is a sentence that says:

    The fact model includes both the conceptual schema and the ground fact population (set of fact instances that instantiate the fact types in the schema).

    REPLACE it with this:

    The fact model includes both the conceptual schema and the ground fact population (set of facts that are formulated using the fact types and other concepts in the schema).

    4. Just above figure 10.1 on page 90 there is the following sentence.

    Figure 10-1 provides a simplified picture of this situation, indicating that the fact model of sentences expressing population facts (instances of domain-specific fact types) is a varset (variable-set) whose population at any given time is a set of facts.

    REPLACE it with this:

    Figure 10-1 provides a simplified picture of this situation, indicating that the fact model of sentences expressing population facts (formulated using domain-specific fact types) is a varset (variable-set) whose population at any given time is a set of facts.

  • Reported: SBVR 1.0 — Tue, 9 Mar 2010 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 13:19 GMT