search

ETPartners / b2mmlv7beta

b2mmlv7beta for review
2 stars 3 forks source link

Represent OperationsMaterialBill as 1st order object and OperationsSegment as target role in composite relationship from OperationsDefinition in OperationsDefinition.xsd to align with updated 950002 #36

Open racheliurui opened 5 years ago

racheliurui commented 5 years ago

Background and Solutions ERDi, MESA: OperationsDefnition.xsd In the Updated 950002 Operations Definition Model, Operations Definition object has an "Has associated" association relationship to Operations Material Bill object which is a first order object. B2MML does not represent Operations Material Bill as a 1st order object.

B2MML is missing the target element for the "has associated" relationship to the Operations Material Bill from Both "OperationsSegmentType" and "OperationsDefinitionType" in OperationsDefinition.xsd.

Operations Definition has a "Contains" composite relationship to Operations Segment as the target role so it is not a 1st order object but master data contained in an Operations Definition; B2MML needs to delete the Operations segment transaction types.

Above are required to align with updated 950002 Operations Definition Model. So the following changes are required:

  1. complexType name = "OperationsDefinitionType ADD:

  2. complexType name = "OperationsSegmentType ADD:

  3. complexType name = "OperationsDefinitionInformationType" ADD:

  4. Global Elements ADD:

  5. Transaction Elements ADD: transaction elements for OperationsMaterialBillType

  6. ADD: OperationsMaterialBill Transaction Types

  7. DELETE: OperationsSegment Transaction Types Deleted Operations segment transaction types since it a composite relationship to OperationsDefinition.

Supporting Document ISA-950002 JWG5 CDV01 version (2019 12) Clause 6.1.1 Operations definition model, Figure 20 – Operations definition model Clause 6.1.2 Operations definition, Table 145 – Operations definition relationship roles Clause 6.1.5 Operations segment, Table 151 – Operations segment relationship roles Clause 6.1.3 Operations material bill, Table 147 – Operations material bill relationship roles

Impacted Types and Solution B2MML-OperationsDefinition.xsd

racheliurui commented 5 years ago

In modification history, it element being added in but then modified.

<xsd:element name = "OperationsMaterialBillID"      type = "IdentifierType"  minOccurs = "0" maxOccurs = "unbounded"/>
<xsd:element name = "OperationsMaterialBill"    type = "OperationsMaterialBillType"  minOccurs = "0" maxOccurs = "unbounded"/>

B2MML Design Rule,

OperationsMaterialBill is the first-order object. (not dependent on another type) First Order object being treated/exchanged as master data, and referred by ID

CharlieG021163 commented 5 years ago

I agree. OperationsMaterialBill is a first order object. The relationship is a simple association so it should be OperationsMaterialBillID. I update OperationDefintionInformation schema with OperationsMaterialBill and OperationsDefintion, and OperationSegment schema with OperationsMaterialBillID. Also, I Add transaction types for OperationsMaterialBill and Deleted them for Operations segment which is a composite relationship to OperationsDefinition.

racheliurui commented 5 years ago

The change is not fully finished. @CharlieG021163 will make more modifications to make it ready.

CharlieG021163 commented 4 years ago

Updated original comment. Ready for final review to submit to MESA

gerardmoloneyetpartners commented 4 years ago

Agreed

terryrankine commented 4 years ago

re-review changes dont align with the comment

CharlieG021163 commented 4 years ago

@terryrankine Referenced changes now align with original comment.

CharlieG021163 commented 4 years ago

@gerardmoloneyetpartners @terryrankine Need to rediscuss this issue since it did not include a complete description of the commit. Original commit has been updated. In latest version fixed TypeO fix: OperationsMaterailBillType is changed to OperationsMaterialBillType in

gerardmoloneyetpartners commented 4 years ago

review with Terry tomorrow and move back to authorised if all is good.

CharlieG021163 commented 4 years ago

Team Agrees

Dennis-Brandl commented 4 years ago

I disagree, OperationsMaterialBill is not a first order object in Part 2 or in Part 5. We should not be making changes of this magnitude. The Material Bill can always be exchanged as part of an Operations Definition, even if it is just used as a container. Remember, B2MML is not the internal structure, just a way to represent exchanged information.