ISO18876

Mon May 13 12:26:37 EDT 2002

Dear Bernd,

Thanks for your comments below. Yours are the only comments I
have received, so I assume that others are happy.

See some responses below to your comments.

I will now complete the various check lists and sign offs

Matthew West
Principal Consultant
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.r.west at is.shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernd G. Wenzel [mailto:bg_wenzel at csi.com]
> Sent: 09 May 2002 14:49
> To: West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE
> Cc: Julian Fowler (E-mail); WG10 (E-mail); Howard Mason (E-mail);
> ISO18876 (E-mail); Gerry Radack (E-mail); Meinolf Gröpper
> Subject: Re: ISO18876
> 
> 
> Matthew,
> 
> due to time constraints I couldn't review ISO 18876-1 and -2 to
> the degree I wanted. Just a couple of observations on ISO
> 18876-1:
> 
>  - I don't see a need, not even a justification for the 2
> normative references.

MW: The two references are for the Information Object Registration
in Annexe A.

>  - I'm not happy with your definition of the term "class". You
> know my comments against ISO 15926-2.

MW: The intention is to define class as broadly as possible.
I will change the definition to "category or division of things" and 
add a note to say this is intended to be a broad as possible.
ISO15926 is able to adopt a tighter definition because of the spatio-
temporal stance it takes.

MW: As a footnote, it is worth mentioning that I have had to spend
consderable time looking into the different things that people think
classes are. When you consider how basic to our thinking it is, it is
surprising how varied are the ideas of what a class is.

>  - Your example at the definition of the term "individual" seems
> to support my point. Applying your definition of "class",
> "starship enterprise" is a class containing several individuals,
> such as a contemporary NASA shuttle, a starship commanded by
> James T. Kirk, and another starship commanded by Jean Luc Piccard
> about 100 years later.

MW: The only sense here in which "starship enterprise" is a class is 
the one in which it is the class of physical objects that bear the
name "starship enterprise" and that identify the starship "Enterprise",
(the James T Kirk one). I'm afraid this is part of how you misunderstand
the way we treat representation, but we are trying to improve the way
we explain that. In the example, it is what is referred to that is the
example, not the text.

>  - Following the object identifier in Annex A, you have mistyped
> 18876 as 19976.

MW: Has been corrected.
> 
> And here are my observations on ISO 18876-2:
> 
>  - I don't see a need, not even a justification for the first 2
> normative references.

MW: See response above.

>  - I'm not happy with your definition of the term "class". You
> know my comments against ISO 15926-2.

MW: See response above.

>  - Your example at the definition of the term "individual" seems
> to support my point. Applying your definition of "class",
> "starship enterprise" is a class containing several individuals,
> such as a contemporary NASA shuttle, a starship commanded by
> James T. Kirk, and another starship commanded by Jean Luc Piccard
> about 100 years later.

MW: See response above.

>  - Annex D seems to address my main issue, unfortunately not to
> my satisfaction. You say, 

MW: To be precise it is Julian, but no matter.

> that the data type <monument> is a
> class, the members of which are data instances, such as #100. I
> tend to disagree. The data type <monument> is the definition of
> this class, not the class (=collection) itself. 

MW: In this we genuinely disagree. The definition you talk about
is really some set of properties that all members of the class
possess. Now properties are classes, so this means that the class
is the intersection of the property classes. The intersection of
the property classes is then both the definition of the class,
and the membership.

MW: I appreciate there can be different views on this, but the 
view we take is quite valid. Given that this is an example in
an informative annex, and some view has to be taken, I think
it is reasonable that we should take ours.

> In a standard
> trying to cover the integration of industrial data for exchange,
> access, and sharing we need to be very precise and explicit, when
> it comes to the relationship between reality and the data world,
> especially as the latter is part of the first.

MW: I believe we have been, even if we have not always reflected
your own views on some matters.
> 
> In summary, most of my original comments have been addressed
> properly.

MW: Good, and thank you for taking the time to raise the issues. I'm
quite sure the document is better as a result.
> 
> :-) Bernd
> 
> PS: I'm not overly happy with ISO 18876 as it stands right now. I
> think, we need to make a distinction between the definition of a
> class and the population of a class. To me this is as fundamental
> as the distinction between class and individual.
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Bernd G. Wenzel
> Ganghoferstraße 7b
> D-83043 Bad Aibling
> Germany
> 
> Phone: +49-8061-37232
> Fax:      +49-8061-92018
> Mobile: +49-170-9983565
> Email:   bg_wenzel at csi.com
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE" <Matthew.R.West at IS.shell.com>
> To: "WG10 (E-mail)" <wg10 at steptools.com>; "Howard Mason (E-mail)"
> <howard.mason at bae.co.uk>; "ISO18876 (E-mail)"
> <iso18876 at egroups.com>; "Bernd Wenzel (E-mail 2)"
> <BG_Wenzel at compuserve.com>; "Gerry Radack (E-mail)"
> <radack at ctcgsc.org>
> Cc: "Julian Fowler (E-mail)" <jfowler at modulant.com>
> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 3:32 PM
> Subject: ISO18876
> 
> 
> >
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > Please find below the URLs for a revised draft of ISO18876 1&2.
> > The zip files also contain responses to the issues raised
> > against each part.
> >
> > I would appreciate it if you would review the documents, and if
> > you raised issues confirm that you are happy with the
> resolution.
> > I give you until Friday 19th April to review and comment on any
> > last items. At that point I shall conduct the check lists and
> > issue part 1 as a TS, and part 2 for confirmatory ballot.
> >
> > http://www.iso18876.org/iso18876-1.html
> > http://www.iso18876.org/iso18876-2.html
> >
> >
> > Matthew West
> > Principal Consultant
> > Shell Information Technology International Limited
> > Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
> >
> > Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
> > Email: matthew.r.west at is.shell.com
> > Internet: http://www.shell.com
> 