The specification includes figure 11 Occurrence kinds but the diagram is not complete and is not needed. Document number is actually dtc/22-11-05.

Figure removed.

Figure 11 Occurrence Kind will be removed.

SCE was removed from other BPM+ specifications including PPMN and established as a separate specification. PPMN needs to reference the machine readable files associated with the new SCE specification.

Use approved URIs established by the SCE FTF

The PPMN-related XSDs will be updated to use the URIs established for SCE files by the SCE FTF.

The file and namespaces associated with the Parties related machine readable files of the PPMN specification currently use PM in the name and namespace rather than Parties. This has caused confusion in the community. The name should be expanded to Parties to resolve the issue.

Change PM to Parties

Update the file names and namespaces associated with the Parties machine readable files to use "Parties" instead of "PM".

The BKPMN language is referenced in the spec, but it is not an official language yet

Remove references to specifications that do not yet exist.

The document contains references to BKPMN and BHMN that do not currently exist. We will remove these references.

It's unclear what the sequence should be, or even the meaning of grouping the Occurrences into a Chain. Is the "succession" to be based on timing, dependency, causation? Is it an error if they are not in time sequence?
How are the occurrenceHistory related to occurrenceRelationships and/or Dependencies?

BTW the definition should say "in the life of some Entity" as opposed to "NamedElement"

Defer to RTF

Requires further discussion. Defer to RTF.

Occurrences may be linked to Locations regardless of a Party, so it does not make sense to include the Locations package in the Parties model.

Cannot make the change in FTF

This will require creation of a new specification and cannot be done in time for this FTF. Deferred to RTF.

Figure 52 should show AcquisitionKind inheriting from SemanticReference. the other vocabs do have this.

Figure 52 is correct

AcquisitionKind inherits from OwnershipOccurrenceKind and Figure 52 shows that.

Unlike PROV which makes it explicit.
All we have is creationDate, which could refer to a snapshot.

Defer to RTF

Needs further discussion. Defer to RTF.

For example, I would have thought a Performer would always have an interest.

Defer to RTF

Requires discussion with the members. Deferred to RTF.

For best practice and consistency

Defer to RTF

Issue will be deferred to RTF.

It's described in the text of 8.9 but not shown in a diagram or included in the metamodel. It seems useful, to represent the relationship from PROV.

Addressed in SCE. Remove Paragraph.

The Specializes element was removed from the metamodel because it is handled by the "Generalization" element in SCE. The paragraph defining Specialization will be removed.

One says "Output indicates that the target Entity is an output of some kind of the Occurrence.."
and the other says "Product indicates that the source Occurrence produces or creates the target Entity during the course of the Occurrence."
It seems both Product and By-product should be subtypes of Output (should at least be documented if not supported by the metamodel) but there is no definition of what would make a Product.

It's unclear if either would encompass destroying the Entity.

Product and Waste Definitions updated

Product and Waste are more specific kinds of Output. The definitions have been updated to reflect this.

At the moment people would be excluded, based on the definition "An individual concept or informational or physical artifact". However there may be use cases where it's required to track chain of custody of a person e.g. a prisoner, a baby/minor, a patient, a VIP, a witness, an asylum seeker, a dead body, a mummy. All being held and transported and transferred between parties.

Update definition to allow for other things as Entities.

The definition will updated to expand the range of things that can be tracked as Entities.

It's not helped that the descriptions of the properties of OccurrenceRelationship use "dependent", and the properties of Occurrence (Table 14) use "dependency" for both predecessor (OccurrenceRelationships) and occurrenceDependency. It's pretty hard to determine what's canonical vs what's derived. I think that OccurrenceRelationship is intended to be derived from OccurrenceDependency (which involves the more detailed flow of Entities). Another confusing aspect is that OccurrenceDependency is used for outputs: the source of such Dependencies is the Occurrence rather than the Entity produced. Normally (e.g. in UML) the source of a Dependency would be an Entity and it's dependent on the Occurrence that generated/updated it. I think it might be better to rename it. Further confusing is that the PPMNLibrary has a PPMNRelationshipKind of Dependency.

Defer to RTF

This issue will be deferred to RTF.

That would allow for treating a whole chain as a single occurrence for purposes of abstraction/drill down, and address inconsistencies in the current metamodel (e.g. it would seem that a single Occurrence cannot have a subject Entity or interestedParty since they are properties specific to OccurrenceChain).

Defer to RTF

Initial review suggests this may be a beneficial change. Requires additional analysis of impact to metamodel.

Many people will want to use PPMN just for tracking occurrences (which is the level that PROV works at). Understanding how to do this is made a lot more complex by the fact that all the metamodels are presented along with the type/process level information.
Proposal: have the instance/occurrence level information in their own self-contained metamodels and the Type extensions separate.

Defer to RTF

This will require more analysis than time permits. Defer to RTF.

This is one of the 4 classic types of process communication e.g. https://www.brcommunity.com/articles.php?id=b634 - we have the other 3 (input, output, enabler).

[IDEF0 uses different terms - Control instead of Guide and Mechanism instead of Enabler. Use of MVF would enable this]

Defer to RTF

Resolution requires further discussion. The issue will be deferred to RTF.

At the moment it's self-referential "Custody indicates that the source element has custody of the target element."
There are nuances and legal aspects to consider.
For example, if someone is working for a company does the company or the employee have "custody" of the Entity they're working on? Legally it's the Company.
If an Entity is lost or stolen does the finder, or thief, have custody? Legally they do not, apparently.

Updated definition of Custody

The definition of Custody will be updated to include "immediate charge or control".

It's not clear whether this should be in scope (probably not), but at minimum something should be said about it. There are other standards that could be used for contact info, e.g. vCard, and OMG Commons has basic support for identifiers, and the GLEIF ontology has registration information. In general there are several aspects not addressed, several important for provenance - especially being able to identify the party.

• naming
• registration (for companies)
• jurisdiction
• identification (many schemes, including for non-human agents)
• entity type (for companies, but could be used for minors/prisoners)
• date created/born and ceased
• software/hardware version (for non-human agents)

Defer to RTF

Defer to RTF to enable further discussion of scope.

It repeats "is an input":
Input indicates that the target Entity is an input to the source Occurrence is an input during the course of the Occurrence

Remove duplicate verbiage

The duplicate verbiage needs to be removed.

The definition "The time that the Occurrence had the dependency on the Entity” is unclear in usage when the Occurrences themselves have both a start and end.
I think the property could safely be deleted.

Removed time attribute

It's unclear what the attribute should be set to and how dependencies that have a duration will be handled. Therefore to remove the ambiguity the attribute will be removed.

3 mentions in the text of 8.2 and 8.2.1: should be ActivityOccurrenceType

Reference to ActivityType updated to ActivityOccurrenceType

All references to ActivityType updated to ActivityOccurrenceType.

It adds nothing over EntityType

Defer to RTF

Requires further discussion. Defer to RTF.

The definition says "The AttributedTo relationship is a kind of AssociatedWith relationship that captures the fact that an Entity was created or transformed by some unknown activity or action of a Party."

However even if the activity detail is known, there may still be value in giving someone specific (out of all those who may have played some role) credit or responsibility for the Entity e.g. in case of support or other inquiries.

Update AttributedTo definition.

The current definition for AttributedTo is

"The AttributedTo relationship is a kind of AssociatedWith that captures the fact that an element was created or transformed by some unknown activity or action of a Party."

This will be updated to

"The AttributedTo relationship is a kind of AssociatedWith that captures the fact that some activity or action of a Party created, transformed, or destroyed an element."

See the PPMN FTF2 Ballot 4 Convenience Document (dtc/2024-07-01) for details.

In PPMN DerivedFrom::derivee is used to represent the Entity FROM which something was derived; however in English it means the derived element - which is the other named end.
Quoting a definition:
"In linguistics, a derivee is a word that is formed from another word by adding affixes or changing the shape of the root. For example, the word "runner" is a derivee of the word "run".

In general, the word "derivee" means something that is derived from something else. The specific meaning of the word will depend on the context in which it is used.

Here are some examples of how the word "derivee" is used in a sentence:

In mathematics, the derivative of a function is its derivee.
In linguistics, the word "runner" is a derivee of the word "run"."

Change "derivee" to "derivationSource"

Change the attribute "derivee" to "derivationSource" and update the attribute definition to reflect that name change.

These terms all inherit from SCE::SemanticElement which is supposed to have a conceptURI. Though not mandatory in the metamodel it seems bad practice that none of the official library elements have such.

Deferred to RTF

This issue will be deferred to RTF for further discussion.

If only as an exemplar. For example, the standard graphical formats, HTML, PDF, programming languages, XML, XMI etc

Defer to RTF

This issue will be deferred to RTF.

Unlike other relationships this has subclasses for the different types of derivation. But also a DerivationKind (though indirectly linked via DerivationType) with largely the same Library of instances (DerivedFrom, QuotedFrom, RevisionOf, SourcedFrom), though missing subclass DescendantOf (which is self-referentially defined).

BTW there's a missing word "one" in the following under Figure 24
"DerivationTypes support the definition of the expected kinds of derivations that might result in the generation of one EntityType from or more others."

Remove DerivedFrom subclasses and add DescendantOf DerivationKind

The inconsistency will be removed by removing the subclasses of DerivedFrom, adding an association from DerivedFrom to DerivationKind (similar to other typed elements), and adding DescendantOf as a DerivationKind to the library.

It's unclear how to use Snapshot generally, and how the creationDate is supposed to tie in with the Occurrence(s) that updated it.

The scope of a snapshot is not clear, and EntityRelationship is not timestamped in the same way.
If an Occurrence creates and removes some EntityRelationships involving an Entity, how is that represented? ActivityOccurrence::resultingEntityRelationship is not sufficient.

Defer to RTF

This issue will be deferred to the RTF.

It's not clear what isUnique means in practice. For example 8.4.9, what does it mean for a ResponsibilityRelationship to be unique?
I assume it means unique to a specific Entity (it should say) but, if isUnique=true, does it allow any time overlap of responsibilities? What if the responsibility is delegated - won't the original still hold?

Defer to RTF

This issue will be deferred to RTF.

It inherits source and target but does not explain the meaning of the direction. I'd guess that the target is the more canonical and the source is the alternate but it should be spelled out.

Directionality doesn't make any difference

The direction of the relationship is symmetrical - the direction doesn't matter. It simply means that one can be substituted for the other and vice-versa.

ElementType seems to have no way to represent the properties of the type, and TypedElement seems to have no way to represent the values of any properties.
All you can represent is ElementRelationships.
8.1.3 says "entity-type “Thoroughbred Horse” that is used to specific the basic characteristics of thoroughbred horses." but there is nothing I can see that could represent those characteristics, nor their values for the Element Secretariat.

This issue should be handled by specifications that use SCE

The intent for SCE is just to provide the ability to identify elements that are instances and others as their types.
Downstream languages should provide the capability of adding properties to the elements if needed.