In the two reference architectures, the Communications View shows Physical Data Flows (PDF) between Components. In addition, PDFs are specified with Data Objects.
To my understanding, the Communications View should show Interfaces (instead of PDFs) between Components and Interfaces should be specified with Information Objects (instead of Data Objects).
My further understanding of the metamodel:
PDFs should be shown in the Physical View. PDFs are a grouping ("a bundle") of (1..n) Functional Data Flows (FDF).
PDFs are uni-directional while Interfaces can be bi-directional.
One Information Object can consist of several Data Objects. [I willl open a separate issue for Data Model.]
Shortcomings of the existing Communications View:
The connection of Data Objects and PDFs does not exist in the metamodel. (Cause for point 1 above)
The connections (relationships) are not used consistently or not according to the metamodel.
PDFs / Interfaces are not related to FDFs. This should be seen at least in the Traceability. [I will open a separate issue for that.]
Most of the Terminators in the eCall example cannot be seen as Terminators (https://frame-online.eu/frame-architecture/faqs/what-is-a-terminator). They are rather a start event or stop event of a process which should be shown in a process diagram (like e.g. 03 eCall ITS Description – the name of this diagram does not fit to the contents; the numbering is confusing because it is the same number as eCall Organisational View).
In the two reference architectures, the Communications View shows Physical Data Flows (PDF) between Components. In addition, PDFs are specified with Data Objects.
My further understanding of the metamodel:
Shortcomings of the existing Communications View: