UCM 2009 Vision

1. UCM 2009 Vision Scott R. Hinkelman

2. Architecture and Glossary • Goal will be to have the Architecture document and Glossary essentially completed “in content” coming out of Waldorf • Scott (and others) is late in providing words in specific areas and will forwarding info on this • The Architecture document is high level and does not drill down enough into each dimension to show specifics • This is not bad • Given our scope, complexity, importance, and organic approach to spec building we need to consider staging the function to insure productivity increase. • I am proposing my vision in the form of a Roadmap • But not another established UCM document

3. Spec1 - Context Scheme Framework (CSF) • We have good work on the table in modeling - but spanning several areas • UCM will be robust according to the architecture and use cases so we need a staging mechanism to attack each piece • UCM Roadmap does not change what we are working on – only stages it • Context Scheme Framework (CSF) – this will be the spec for the profile work (note: I am suggesting to move way from ‘classification scheme’ terminology) • In the form of a UML profile, it primarily it defines: • basic admin information for any Context Scheme metamodel • the type for Context Value (the code, ID, String discussion) • an abstract Context Point representing a place for value relationships • An abstract Thing (don’t know what to call it) that replaces ‘Classifiable’, which represents the Thing which can be ‘in context’ or ‘have context assigned to’. • It does not define • what the relationships (tree nodes, tables, etc) are between the values • Any grammar or expressions – since these are specific to aligning schemes • It permits • Positioning for future consistency with other CEFACT UML Profiles • Multiple Context Schemes, in the form of UML metamodels, to be defined • with some level of consistency (to enable software frameworks to be defined) • based on different context value relationships (Tree node, RDB tables, etc)

4. Spec2 – TreeSet Context Scheme (TCS) • We currently have two metamodels on the table (Scott’s and Tony’s/Gunther’s) • We need to strive to combine these together • This is our primary work item - I suggest this be the second spec – for now lets call it TreeSet Context Scheme - TCS • TCS is dependent on CSF • In the form of a UML metamodel, it primarily defines: • A recursive context scheme • Ability to indicate relevancy within the recursion (pull from Scott’s model) • (I don’t know where to put the temporal information – here or in the profile) • It does not include • any form of grammar, union, intersection, etc (scope reduction) • It permits a widely accepted approach to organizing context values • (It is import to note here that other folks may want to utilize CSF to build a different Context Scheme - perhaps a table-based approach) • Nothing new in our modeling efforts beyond scope reduction for this spec

5. Spec3 – TreeSet Context Scheme Expression (TCSE) • Obviously the next spec is grammar, union, etc • To define such ‘Expressions, it seems it is dependent on the specific Context Scheme relationship design • For TCS, the TCSE (TreeSet Context Scheme Expression) spec will: • Define the grammar (BNF, union classifiers, whatever) appropriate for TCS

6. Moving Forward • In order to insure we establish the UCM foundation with reachable deliverables in 2009 • The Context Scheme Framework (CSF) and The TreeSet Context Scheme (TCS) are must haves for UCM 1.0 • TreeSet Context Scheme Expression (TCSE) is a must have for UCM 2.0 • Specifically, we will not focus on, and remove from our work, anything to do with expressions and move it to the TCSE spec. • UCM dependencies and roadmap beginnings start to look like: TCSE 2010 2009 2009 TCS 2009 CSF