Chapter 9.2 is a concept dictionary.
Some words are 'red' because they are keywords in structured English.
If you look into SBVR 1.4 documentation you can see that when there is 'red' word it has non-serif font.

If you look at definition 'business policy' in BMM 1.3 you can see that first word 'that' is written using serif font, but second 'and that' is written using non-serif font.
Others concept has 'red' words written using only serif font.

What version is correct? Serif or non-serif?

The 9th dot has sentence:
'Broader Influencer categorizes Narrower Influencer Category'
I think there is lack of word 'Category' and the sentence should be 'Broader Influencer Category categorizes Narrower Influencer Category'.

Second definition on page 64 is:
'broader desired result category categorizes more specific desired result'
I think there is omission of word 'category' and I think the sentence should be:
'broader desired result category categorizes more specific desired result category'

6th dot is a sentence:
A problem for on-airport car rental companies is that all the competitors offer similar types of car, and are physically
lined up in a row. (This Environment is an External Influencer for EU-Rent.) There is very little room for maneuver on
product, service, or price. (This is a Weakness Assessment.)

I think that sentence in parenthesis: ('This Environment is an External Influencer for EU-Rent.') should be formated as italic.

On page 70 there s definition of 'tactic'.
The word 'tactic' has incorrect font type.
If you look closer you can see that the word is smaller and this is non-serif font.

In definition 'organization unit' in part 'Example' line #1 there is a mistake in phrase: '...butiness units,...'
There is 'butiness' - should be 'business' (t->s)

5th paragraf has sentence:
'The dividing line between ‘minor Strategy’ and ‘major Tactic’ is blurred.'

But one sentence before there is:
'...from major Strategies... to minor Tactics...'

I think there is word swap and the sentence should be:
'The dividing line between ‘major Strategy’ and ‘minor Tactic’ is blurred.'

On page there is definition of 'fixed asset'.
The 1st line of definition is:
'asset that is maintained over time and reused'
I think there is omission of word 'Definition:' and the whole phrase should be:
'Definition: asset that is maintained over time and reused'

On Figure 7.3 between CourseOfAction and DesiredResult there is association 'CourseofActionChannelsEffortsTowardsDesiredResult'.
If you look closer you can see that arrow after name is 'top-down'.
If you compare Figure 8.7 on page 29 the arrow is directed from CourseOfAction' to 'DesiredResult'.
I think that arrow on Figure 7.3 has incorrect direction.

Paragraf #5 in section 7.3.3 has 2nd sentence:
'Generally, Strategies are selected to move the enterprise towards its goals, and Tactics to ensure that it meets its Objectives.'
I think that word 'goals' should have 1st letter big: 'Goals'

Below definition 'desired result category categorizes desired result' there is unnecessary(I think) line of text 'broader desired result category'.

I was looking for critical success factors and KPI as proposed to be used by the balanced scorecard approach on page 12 in the meta model. I could not find, however on page 79 with its introduction "Implicit in many areas of the Business Motivation Model is the subject of metrics.". It would be niced to have this somehow vizualized in the meta model. It is unclear to me, what "many" means in this context. If I mentally map the BSC model to what is described in your document I would assume, that their strategy definition overlaps to your >90% and that CSF and KPI from the balanced scorecard only relate to you describe as "courses of action".

Also it would be nice to see interfaces to other (OMG) models in the document. E.g. TOGAF comes along with "capability" as one of their primary concepts. I find myself to have a hard time to find out, how what you defined as "course of action" relates to what TOGAF calls "capability" and how the maturity of capabilities can be assessed and improved by strongly supporting a courses of action.

I send issue #41581 "INBOX-437".
I would like to add, thet the problem described in issue #41576 should be expanded on section 9.6 and table on pages 73-75.
Thank you!

I think there is a problem with inconsistent use of 'narrower' and 'more specific' in categories' categorization.

On page 72 in table you have these sentences:
broader assessment category categorizes more specific assessment category ---- BroaderAssessmentCategoryCategorizesNarrowerAssessmentCategory
broader desired result category includes more specific desired result category ---- BroaderDesiredResultCategoryIncludesMoreSpecficDesiredResultCategory <-->[incorrect word 'includes' I send in another Bug/Issue]
broader influencer category categorizes more specific influencer category ---- BroaderInfluencerCategoryCategorizesNarrowerInfluencerCategory
broader organization category categorizes more specific organization category ---- BroaderOrganizationCategoryCategorizesNarrowerOrganizationCategory

On page 58 you have these sentences:
Broader Desired Result Category categorizes Narrower Desired Result Category
Broader Assessment Category categorizes Narrower Assessment Category
Broader Organization Category categorizes Narrower Organization Category
Broader Influencer [Category] categorizes Narrower Influencer Category <-->[lacking of word 'Category' I send in another Bug/Issue]

In section 9.2 'Concepts' you have these main concepts:
broader assessment category categorizes narrower assessment category
broader desired result category categorizes more specific desired result [category] <-->[lacking of word 'category' I send in another Bug/Issue]
broader influencer category categorizes narrower influencer category
broader organization category categorizes narrower organization category

And of course Figure 7.3 on page 18.

So as you can see there is inconsistent use of word 'narrower' and 'most specific'. There is a mix of combinations.
I know that this is 'almost the same' but I think the whole documentation should have one choosed version.

It should reference MOF/UML.
The reference to SBVR should be more specific - at least to the OMG spec page http://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/, if not a document number - depending on whether it's dependent on a specific version of SBVR (I suspect it is).
References to commercial dictionaries are not appropriate since I presume any text is copied into this spec, and people do not need to access the dictionary to use/understand the BMM spec.

Section 5 has BPDM which is no longer relevant.
6.1 sentence 1 should not reference the BRG published version.
6.1 para 2 references the wrong Annexes of SBVR for Structured English. BTW since that's not normative I don't know if other specifications should be relying on it.
6.2 should remove the list of FTF voting members and reference to Artisan Studio (no longer used AFAIK).
Annex E is of questionable value. If retained it should include BMM 1.3.
Figure F.3 does not represent latest SBVR.
Annex F should remove mention of Organization Structure Model (F.4) which never became an OMG standard. Likewise footnote 2 in Annex D should be removed.
Annex 8 referecnes are outdated, and many not relevant (e.g. BPDM).

Annex F should be updated to describe alignment with SMM (for metrics) and VDML.

As per the title

In definition 'offering uses fixed asset' there is incorrect formating of word 'fixed'.
The word 'fixed' is blue and italic but I think it should be green and underscored.

There is definition of 'customer'.
The 3rd sentence is:
'Dictionary Basis an official or authoritative instruction [ODE 'directive']'
This sentence is unnecessary because it is example from 'directive'.

On Figure 7.3 if you look at class 'InfluencerCategory' you can see association from that class to itself.
The name is 'BroaderInfluencerCategorizesNarrowerInfluencerCategory'.
In table in section 9.5 on page 72 line #3 there is UML name 'BroaderInfluencerCategoryCategorizesNarrowerInfluencerCategory'.
So I think on Figure 7.3 is missing word '...Category...' in association name.

On Figure 7.3 if you look at class 'DesiredResultCategory' you can see association from that class to itself.
The name is 'BroaderDesiredCategoryCategorizesMoreSpecficDesiredResultCategory'.
In table in section 9.5 on page 72 line #2 there is UML name 'BroaderDesiredResultCategoryIncludesMoreSpecficDesiredResultCategory'.
First of all: I think on Figure 7.3 is missing word '...Result...' in association name.
Second of all: I send this with another Bug/Issue but there is another mistake in table on page 72: 'BroaderDesiredResultCategoryIncludesMoreSpecficDesiredResultCategory' has word '...Include...' instead of '...Categorizes...' but this Bug/Issue is about lacking of word 'Result'

In table in section 9.5 on page 72 line #2
there is SBVR name 'broader desired result category includes more specific desired result category'
there is UML name 'BroaderDesiredResultCategoryIncludesMoreSpecficDesiredResultCategory'.
I think there is mistake: both sentences has word '...includes...' instead of '...categorizes...', because if you compare this to the whole document every time when you talk about categories' categorization you use word 'categorizes' not 'includes'.

In table in section 9.5 there are 54 rows.
In table in section 9.6 there are only 52 rows.

There is lack of:
broader desired result category includes more specific desired result category — BroaderDesiredResultCategoryIncludesMoreSpecficDesiredResultCategory
desired result category categorizes desired result ---- DesiredResultCategoryCategorizesDesiredResult

Is this intentionally or is this omission?

On Figure 8.13 there is class 'Regulation' inherited directly from class 'Influencer'.
But on page 18 on Figure 7.3 between them there is class 'ExternalInfluencer'.

Is this intentionally or is this omission?