cschneider4711
commented
3 years ago Nice idea... Yep, there is definitely some kind of indirect relationship between the processed assets as being based on the stored/sent/received ones. Even in some model-validating rules this is checked.
The ideas was to allow a top-down modeling approach to model the communication links after all the components have been modeled and therefore already have a laid-out plan of what to process (as some kind of cross-check). But indeed, when modeling this all in a row, the value could also nicely be inferred, easing the modeling process.
aceg1k
ezavgorodniy
joreiche
Hi,
thank you very much for your great work on this project, I hope it is still active and open for pull requests.
Rationale
Whenever data assets are stored, sent or received by a technical asset they are also processed in some way by that technical asset. This leads to tight coupling of
data_assets_processedwithdata_assets_stored,data_assets_sentanddata_assets_received(relating to both, outgoing and incoming communication links). IMHOdata_assets_processedis of almost no practical use, when a data asset processed is not stored and not transferred somewhere.Proposal
Infer
data_assets_processedbased on data assets stored and data assets used in outgoing and incoming communication links and do not requiredata_assets_processedto be set and continuously maintained.As a stored data asset always implies a processed data asset some of the code became redundant and was removed.
I look forward to your feedback!