| Key | Issue | Reported | Fixed | Disposition | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTV14-3 | SBVR xml file is not readable properly | DTV 1.3 | open | |||
| DTV14-2 | Unusual use of 'that' in definitions | DTV 1.0 | open | |||
| DTV14-1 | Date-Time Issue: OCL should be integrated into UML model | DTV 1.0b1 | open | |||
| DTV11-104 | DTV Issue: 'date time' associations | DTV 1.0 | open |
action: open in a browser https://www.omg.org/spec/DTV/20160301/sbvr.xml
reaction: This page contains the following errors:
error on line 782 at column 3: Encoding error
OMG Specification: Date Time Vocabulary
Version: 1.0
Title: Unusual use of 'that' in definitions
Summary:
In clause 8.5, the Definition of ‘time scale’ reads:
“regular sequence that each member of the regular sequence is a time point”
I see nothing in SBVR Annex C that suggests a meaning for this. I would expect:
<more general concept> that <verb> <other roles>
where the ‘that’ is the subject (role 1) of the verb concept wording;
or
<more general concept> that <subject> <verb>
where the ‘that’ is the direct object (role 2) of the verb concept wording.
But in the given definition, the verb is ‘is’, the subject is ‘each member of the regular sequence’ and the direct object is ‘a time point’. What role does the ‘that’ play? How does this delimit ‘regular sequence’?
The intention is: “regular sequence such that each member of the regular sequence is a time point”
or: “regular sequence of which each member is a time point”
or: “regular sequence (all of) whose members are time points”
The first is a style that is conventional in mathematics, but perhaps not in business usage. It is not mentioned in SBVR Annex C, but neither of the others is, either. Is this an SBVR SE problem?
Note: there are several definitions in DTV with ‘that’ playing no clear role in the delimiting verb. This is just one example of the usage.
Currently, OCL statements are created directly in the specification document, then "stripped out" of the document into a separate file via an XSLT transform. In a further step, the OCL should be integrated into the UML model so that the model includes the OCL constraints.
Specification: DTV v1.0
Title: 'date time' associations
Source: Ed Barkmeyer (for the RTF), NIST, edbark@nist gov
Figure 10.17 has the wrong association names on 'date time' has 'date' and 'date time' has 'time'.
Should be: 'date time combines calendar date' and 'date time combines time of day coordinate'. And 'time' should be 'time of day coordinate'.
The business term 'date' should be a synonym for 'calendar date'.
We already have "of" as a synonymous form for 'combines' in 10.6.3. But the SynonymousForm 'compound time coordinate of atomic time coordinate' should be 'compound time coordinate has atomic time coordinate'.