Skip to content

Section 6.4: CIM Model Manager concensus is required on Class Extension Rules  #34

Description

@tviegut

In reference to introductory paragraph stated below:

Class names start with upper case (UpperCamelCase rule). Class names should use singular form. Class names must be unique across the whole CIM. Be aware there is a potential conflict of profile names and class names that may occur from the 62361-100 NDR standard for XSD naming rules, so the choice of profile names and class names should be made with this consideration.

Tanja Kostic commented:

This is inversion of control. We cannot rename CIM classes because somebody defined the profile with the same name as a CIM class. This should be stated in the profile definition document, something like: Profile name should not duplicate CIM UML class name as this causes conflicts with envelope name when following existing XSD profile naming rules.

Would you rename Core::Equipment class? We have to rename Equipment profile and envelope element.

Kendall commented:

I like the rewording here. In my opinion, the issue is with NDR decisions and the complication could have been avoided. I was not part of that discussion and accept its a potential conflict as the NDR is written.

Update 2013-05-15 [Kendall]: There is no need at all to talk about profiles here. It's a problem of profile definition what name to choose; CIM does not care. I would like we remove the sentence.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    cim mm consensus neededCIM Model Manager consensus neededdocumentationImprovements or additions to documentationquestionFurther information is requested

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions