2.3.2 AP217 Interpretation (by Julian Fowler)
●方針 : 217ARMの刷新(最新の共通BB+MariSTEPによるImplementation作業とtest結果よりなされた217の更新)。AP216/218からのInterpretation作業。AP227からのInterpretation作業。
●目標 : 可能な限りAP216/218およびAP227との整合性を図る。
●San Diego WorkshopでのARM issuesと結論
‐主に、マイナーな技術的/文書的見直し
‐現状ARMをInterpretationのために安定したものとする。
●議論と要求の見直し
‐ARMに関する要求の明確化
‐Interpretation/mapping工程への入力情報
｡?chedule
‐Mapping table, Short & Long formを本年7月末までに完了とする。
‐Product structureとPDMスキーマに関する作業が今後発生する。
Interpretation Approach
・Reuse 216/218 mapping tables AIM short from components:
・unchanged, or minimum change as needed by other 217 requirements
・Reuse mapping from 227 for piping technical data
・Avoid conflicts between these two sources as far as possible.
・Item subtypes mapped to product:
・different from 216/218 (but may be an issue on 218 in this respect);
・common approach to 227;
・rationale: piping systems contain large numbers of "commodity" produced items
・Constraints:
・product context(a potential conflict with 227);
・classification of different item types
・Definitions map to product_defionition
・Different instances of product_definition for specific and occurrence definitions
・Constraints:
・product definition context (restrictions on application_context. name - same as AP227);
・classification based on definition hierarchy
・"Attribute data" - mapped to representation/representation_item
Issues
・Consistency of AP216/217/218 mappings to product;
・Product structure/configuration management-
・differences between ship APs (SCM) and AP 227 (Ship APs have mapping different than AP227 mainly for product_definition, hence harmonisation is necessary for CCs), see Figure 1; (Ship/LH15)
・More than five commercial implementations expected to be available for AP227 by the end of 1999
⇒the overlap should be as big as possible.
・role of "common" PDM schema/modules
・Detailed issues around Item/Definition mappings
