[Essential Metamodel] Change Request : Missing slots linking Attribute_Value with EA_CLASS | EA_Relation instances

Post Reply
User avatar
tkinte
Posts: 146
Joined: 18 Nov 2014, 08:24
Location: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tshitshi-kia-ntoni
Contact:

Hi,

the current slots set of the Attribute_Value Class doesn't allow the association with any instance of EA_Class or EA_Relation despite the definition of the Attribute and Attribute_Value Classes. It will be beneficial to allow association with instances of type other than Technology_instance.
The requested change is similar with the one lastly applied to the Security_Classification metamodel.

Code: Select all

Attribute : 
Meta class that is used to define attributes for other classes. 
The modeller should create instances of this class in order to define a particular attribute, e.g. cost. 
Usages of this class are then associated with Instances of artefacts that have that attribute in order to 
specify the value for that attribute.

Code: Select all

Attribute_Value : 
Meta class that is, in effect, a usage of an instance of an Attribute class with 
the associated value of the attribute in a particular instance. 
E.g. the cost of a Business Process.

SLOT NAME	:  inverse_of_technology_instance_attributes			
INVERSE SLOT NAME	:  technology_instance_attributes		
TARGET CLASS  :  Technology_Instance

Suggestion :

Code: Select all

New Slots

1° ea_instance_attributes 
	Multiple
	Value Type : instance of Attribute_Value Class or SubClass
	Domain : EA_Class, EA_Relation, :EA_Graph_Relation
	
2° inverse_of_ea_instance_attributes
	Multiple
	Value Type :  instance of EA_Class, EA_Relation, :EA_Graph_Relation Class or SubClass
	Domain : Attribute_Value

Code: Select all

	
Change on existing Slots

1° attribute_value
	Multple
	Value Type : any primitive value  or Instance
	
Rationale

With the suggested change we could for instance model Export or Import as Product
and define Country of Origin, Country of destination, Dates, Goods, Importer, and Exporter as Attribute Values linked to instances of other classes.
No need to defne new Classes or Slots. No impact on the complexity of the metamodel.

Best regards,

Tshitshi
jasonp
Posts: 71
Joined: 01 Jul 2017, 07:05

Hi Tshitshi,

thank you for the suggested change, which we completely understand the benefit of making. In fact, we have come very close in the past to making this exact change. The main reason for our hesitation was that we felt there was a danger that modellers may be tempted into proliferating ad-hoc Attribute and Attribute Value instances when Class/Slot extensions would be a more manageable way to capture the required knowledge. Perhaps, as long as we ensure that the change is accompanied by appropriate guidelines, then such a change would be rightly viewed as just another option for capturing certain types of knowledge about EA elements. Would you agree?

Thanks,

Jason
User avatar
tkinte
Posts: 146
Joined: 18 Nov 2014, 08:24
Location: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tshitshi-kia-ntoni
Contact:

Hi Jason.

Thank you for your feed-back.

I Perfectly agree with you. This option should be understood as a marginal complement to the standard one : class/slot.
You are right, appropriate guidelines are needed indeed. One recommandation should be to only use the additional option only when the there is no standard way to capture the targeted knowledge.
And the definition of attributes/values should be kept coherent with a clear domain specific logic.

Can we expect to see the change shiped with a next release ?
In the meantime could you please provide us with instructions on how to make the change so that it is correctly applied in Protégé ?

Thank you very much for your help.

Best regards,

Tshitshi
User avatar
tkinte
Posts: 146
Joined: 18 Nov 2014, 08:24
Location: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tshitshi-kia-ntoni
Contact:

Hi Jason.
Any news about this topic ?
Best regards

Tshitshi
jasonp wrote: 08 Dec 2022, 10:09 Hi Tshitshi,

thank you for the suggested change, which we completely understand the benefit of making. In fact, we have come very close in the past to making this exact change. The main reason for our hesitation was that we felt there was a danger that modellers may be tempted into proliferating ad-hoc Attribute and Attribute Value instances when Class/Slot extensions would be a more manageable way to capture the required knowledge. Perhaps, as long as we ensure that the change is accompanied by appropriate guidelines, then such a change would be rightly viewed as just another option for capturing certain types of knowledge about EA elements. Would you agree?

Thanks,

Jason
User avatar
tkinte
Posts: 146
Joined: 18 Nov 2014, 08:24
Location: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tshitshi-kia-ntoni
Contact:

Hi

Any news about this topic ?

Let's open all the potential of Essential Metamodel more structurally than ... Capacities is a place for all your information ...

Best regards

Tshitshi
Post Reply