****Apologies for cross postings*****



                        - OnToContent 2006 -

      Workshop on Ontology Content and Evaluation in Enterprise

            -With two tracks on eHealth and Human Resources-



********************************************************************

***  Proceedings published by Springer LNCS                      ***

***  Invited Speaker: To be announced                            ***

***  Submission Deadline: June 30, 2006                          ***

***  Topics: Ontology Content, Evaluation, standardization       ***

***               Enterprise, eHealth, Human Resources           ***

***  http://www.starlab.vub.ac.be/staff/mustafa/OnToContent06    ***

********************************************************************

    In conjunction of the International Federated Conferences (OTM '06)

                   3-4 Nov 2006, Montpellier, France



This workshop is organized by the Ontology Outreach Authority OOA

(Knowledge Web NoE). The OOA is devoted to develop strategies for ontology

recommendation and standardization, thereby promoting and providing

outreach for verifiable quality ontological content.



Current trends within the Semantic Web research are mainly concerned with

technological issues, such as language capabilities, inference services,

etc. Yet less attention has been given to ontology content and its

quality.This workshop aims to focus on content issues, such as

methodologies and tools concerned with modeling good ontologies,

approaches to ontology content evaluation, quality measures, ontology

content management (e.g. metadata,libraries, and registration), ontology

documentation, etc. The workshop also aims to give a special attention to

ontology content issues in two industrial sectors: human resources and

employment, and healthcare and life sciences.



We welcome papers and (past/planned) project descriptions that discuss

ontology modeling and evaluation aspects, particularly:

* Research papers presenting theoretical solutions, but with a clear

   illustration on how these solutions can be applied in industry.

* Position papers presenting opinions on some aspect of ontology practice,

   or describing work that is still in progress, but sufficiently mature to

   warrant attention.

* Business experience and case studies specifying requirements,

   challenges, or opportunities of modeling and applying ontologies in

   industry.



Workshop Structure

================

The workshop consists of three tracks: Ontology Evaluation, Ontologies in

Human Resources and Employment, and ontologies in Healthcare and life

sciences:



Methods and tools for ontology evaluation:

       * Ontological evaluation.

       * Logical evaluation.

       * Usability/usefulness evaluation.

       * Ontology compliance to standards.

       * Ontology standardization and recommendation scenarios.

       * Ontology metadata, and libraries.

       * Ontology documentation.

       * Ontology registration and certification.

       * Ontology interoperability.

       * Consensus reaching.

       * Business cases studies.



Ontologies in Human Resources

       * Modeling and representation of: Jobs, CVs, Competencies, Skills,

          Employees, People, Organizations, Social Events, etc.

       * HR upper level concepts.

       * Semantics of HR-XML.

       * Semantic metadata for HR applications.

       * Semantics in job matching.

       * Semantics in learning technologies.

       * Multilinguality in human resources ontologies.

       * Best practice and semantic patterns in ontology modeling and

         evaluation.



Ontologies for Healthcare and Life sciences

       * Ontologies in Biomedicine and bioinformatics.

       * Ontologies of diseases, nursing, therapeutics, drug, etc.

       * Upper level concepts of healthcare and life sciences ontologies.

       * Semantic metadata for Clinical Data Interchange.

       * Semantics of medical XML standards and vocabularies.

       * Multilinguality in Biomedicine and bioinformatics ontologies.

       * Best practice and semantic patterns in ontology modeling and

         evaluation



Submissions

============

We invite (A) research papers describing original studies of no more than

12 pages; (B) Position papers presenting opinions or work in progress of

no more than 6 pages; and (C) Business experience and case studies of no

more than 8 pages. Submitted papers will be fully refereed based on the

originality and significance of the ideas presented as well as on

technical aspects. Each paper will be reviewed by at least one expert from

academia, and at least one expert from industry. The final proceedings

will be published by Springer Verlag as LNCS (Lecture Notes in Computer

Science). Author instructions can be found at:

http://www.springer.de/comp/lncs/authors.html
The paper submission site is located at:

http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/fedconf/ontocontent/2006/papers



Important Dates

============

       * June 23, 2006 : Abstract Submission Deadline

       * June 30, 2006: Paper Submission Deadline

       * August 10, 2006 : Acceptance Notification

       * August 20, 2006 : Final Version Due

       * November 3-4, 2006: Workshop



Organizers and program chairs

=========================

       * Mustafa Jarrar, STARLAb, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

       * Claude Ostyn, IEEE, USA

       * Werner Ceusters, University of Buffalo ,USA

       * Andreas Persidis, Biovista, Greece



Program Committee

===============

       * Andrew Stranieri , JUSTSYS, Ballarat, Australia

       * Alain Leger, FranceTelecom, France

       * Aldo Gangemi, LOA, ISTC-CNR, Rome, Italy

       * André Valente , Knowledge Systems Ventures, USA

       * Avigdor Gal , Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Ilsrael

       * Barry Smith, State University of New York at Buffalo, USA

       * Bill Andersen , Ontology Works, USA

       * Bob Colomb, The University of Queensland, Australia

       * Christiane Fellbaum , Princeton University, USA

       * Christopher Brewster, University of Sheffield, UK

       * Ernesto Damiani, Milan University, Italy

       * Fausto Giunchiglia, University of Trento, Italy

       * Francesco Danza, Expert System SpA, Italy

       * Franckie Trichet, IRIN - CS Research Institute, France

       * Giancarlo Guizzardi, University of Twente, The Netherlands

       * Giorgos Stamou, National Technical University of Athens, Greece

       * Hans Akkermans, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands

       * Jeff Pan, University of Aberdeen, UK

       * Jens Lemcke, SAP, Germany

       * John Sowa, IBM, USA

       * Joost Breuker, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

       * Karl Stroetmann, Empirica, Germany

       * Kewen Wang, Griffith University, Australia

       * Luk.Vervenne, Synergetics, Belgium

       * Miguel-Angel Sicilia   , University of Alcal?, Spain

       * Mohand-Said Hacid, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1 LIRIS, France

       * Nikolay Mehandjiev, University of Manchester, UK

       * Paolo Bouquet, University of Trento, Italy

       * Paul Piwek , Open university, UK

       * Robert Meersman, STARLAb, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

       * Robert Tolksdorf, Free university of Berlin, Germany

       * Sergio Tessaris, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

       * Silvie Spreeuwenberg, LibRT, The Netherlands

       * Stephen McGibbon, Microsoft, UK

       * Theo Hensen, CWI, The Netherlands

       * Yannick Legré , CNRS, France

       * Yannis Charalabidis, National Tech.University of Athens, Greece

       * Yaser Bishr, Image Matters, USA

_________________________________________
  Dr. Mustafa Jarrar
  STARLab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
  Tel: +32 2 6293487 , Fax :+32 2 6293819
  mjarrar@...  mustafa@...
  http://www.starlab.vub.ac.be/staff/mustafa
____________________________________________

**** Apologies for cross posting,
========CALL FOR PAPERS - Deadline: June 24, 2004===================

                    The 3nd Workshop on
                   Regulatory Ontologies

   WWW: www.starlab.vub.ac.be/staff/mustafa/WORM_2004.htm
  Part of the International Federated Conferences (OTM '04)
       **Proceedings published by Springer LNCS **
           31 Oct-4 Nov 2005, Larnaca, Cyprus

In many application areas (such as e-commerce, e-government, content
standardization, legal information systems etc.), the modeling of regulatory
and legal knowledge is critical. Modeling and deploying regulatory knowledge
has some specifics that differentiate it out from other kinds of knowledge
modeling: reasoning methods and application scenarios, the legal weight
(/order) of regulations, parsing legal texts require special semantic
patterns, the sensitivity in cross-border regulations, etc. This workshop
aims at bringing together academics, researchers, professionals and
industrial practitioners to discuss issues involved in modeling regulatory
ontologies.

Regulatory ontologies typically involve the description of rules and
regulations within the social world. In particular, we seek original
contributions on (but not limited to) the following issues of interest:

- Engineering of regulatory ontologies: conceptual analysis, representation,
modularization and layering, reusability, evolution and dynamics, etc.

- Multilingual and terminological aspects of regulatory ontologies

- Models of legal reasoning (from ontological viewpoint): regulatory
compliance, case-based reasoning, reasoning with uncertainty, etc.

- Sensitivity on and harmonization of regulations

- Regulatory metadata and content standardization (e.g. legal-XML/LeXML,
ADR/ODR-XML,...)

- Regulatory ontologies of: property rights, persons and organizations,
legal procedures, contracts, legal causality, etc.

- Task models for socially regulated activities

- Experiences with projects and applications involving regulatory ontologies
in legal knowledge based systems, legal information retrieval,
e-governments, e-commerce

- Automated extraction of Information from regulatory documents

== WORM 2005 Submission

We invite papers of no more than 14 pages length (Springer style format)
describing original completed work, work in progress, interesting problems
or use cases, or trends in this research area. Submitted papers will be
fully refereed based on the originality and significance of the ideas
presented as well as on technical aspects. Accepted papers will be published
by Springer-Verlag as a part of Proceedings of OTM05.

Papers and abstracts submission via
  http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/fedconf/worm/2004/papers/submit/

== WORM 2005 Important Dates
  June 24, 2005 : Abstract Submission Deadline
  June 29, 2005 : Paper Submission Deadline
  July 29, 2005 : Acceptance Notification
  August 20, 2005 : Final Version Due
  October 31 - November 4, 2005: Workshop

== WORM 2005 Organizers
Mustafa Jarrar, STARLAb, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium:
      mjarrar@...
Aldo Gangemi, Laboratory for Applied Ontology, ISTC-CNR, Rome:
      a.gangemi@...
Joost Breuker , Leibniz Center for Law, Netherlands:
      breuker@...
Jos Lehmann, Laboratory for Applied Ontology, ISTC-CNR, Rome:
      jos.lehmann@...

== WORM 2005 Program Committee (tbc)
* Aldo Gangemi, Laboratory for Applied Ontology, ISTC-CNR, Rome, Italy
* André Valente, Knowledge Systems Ventures, USA
* Andrew Stranieri, JUSTSYS, Ballarat, Australia
* Bart Verheij, Universiteit Maastricht, The Netherlands
* Cecilia Magnusson Sjoberg, Stockholm University, Sweden
* Enrico Franconi, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy
* Carole Hafner, Northeastern University, USA
* Giancarlo Guizzardi, University of Twente, The Netherlands
* Guiraude Lame, Ecole Nationale Superieure des Mines de Paris, France
* Jaime Delgado, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
* Joost Breuker, Leibniz Center for Law, Netherlands
* Jos Lehmann, Laboratory for Applied Ontology, ISTC-CNR, Rome Italy
* Layman Allen, University of Michigan, USA
* Leonardo Lesmo, Universita' di Torino, Italy
* Marc Wilikens, EU Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy
* Mariano Fernandez Lopez, Universidad Politecnica de  Madrid, Spain
* Mustafa Jarrar, STARLab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
* Radboud Winkels, Leibniz Center for Law, Netherlands
* Robert Tolksdorf, Free university of Berlin, Germany
* Richard Benjamins, ISOCO, Spain
* Rita Temmerman, Erasmushogeschool Brussels, Belgium
* Said Tabet, The RuleML Initiative, Boston, USA
* Tom van Engers, Leibniz Center for Law, Netherlands
* Trevor Bench-Capon, University of Liverpool, UK
* Valentina Tamma, University of Liverpool, UK
* Youssef Amghar, Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systemes
d'Information, INSA de Lyon, France

Just a quick note to let everyone know that www.ObjectRoleModeling.com is
now a fully functional ORM portal with a bunch of new features (in addition
to the blog that was there before) that include:

(*) Articles, primers, and other ORM-related content
(*) ORM tool resources
(*) News, events, and links
(*) Threaded discussion areas on ORM, Visio, and more

Feedback is, of course, appreciated.

FYI,
Scot.
..........................
Scot Becker

Orthogonal Software
www.orthogonalsoftware.com

Hi Don... how come I never see you anymore?

I think when you say 'ring' people get the wrong idea.  The terms
more frequently used are recursive or involuted relationships.

To express this generically in a data model is actually very easy.
It is either:
a M:M relationship between an entity and itself, or (your brand
example)
a 1:M relationship between an entity and itself. (your region
example)
For a long time I have felt like this is one of the top 5 ways a
data modeler can cop-out of his or her responsibility to capture
business rules and the meaning of the data.

What you are wisely struggling with is the bigger question of what
are the rules for a SPECIFIC (not generic) case.  I would first
abandon the idea of creating a generic data model.  You might
implement a generic physical structure... that is another question.


The critical thing to consider is to what purpose these categories
are being developed.  Purpose and meaning are inseparable.  If your
clients have more than one purpose, very likely they need more than
one category.

You may find that when you inventory the different purposes that you
have more than one category, each new category will be simpler than
the all-in-one category that you started with.

We, and especially our clients, find this to be counter-intuitive.
They think that more codes is worse than fewer codes.  And, "If he
and I are using different codes then how are we ever going to get
any consistency around this place!"  The truth is, so long as you
use the same code and code value to do more than one thing then your
consistency is coincidence and you will constantly be struggling
over the stewardship of those codes.

Consider longitude and latitude.  Superficially, they do the same
thing and they are expressed similarly.  But, each has its own
domain, its own range of values, they behave differently.  Imagine
having to use a single set of codes for both... Looking closer have
different purposes.  It is a far superior to have two codes that
work together than a single code.

I really should be improving health care...

-----Original Message-----
From: jcm@yahoogroups.com [mailto:jcm@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 5:33 PM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [JCM] Digest Number 347



There are 3 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

       1. Re: generalized ring structures
            From: "Thomas B. Cox" <tbcox23@...>
       2. RE: generalized ring structures
            From: "Tonner, Don E" <don.tonner@...>
       3. RE: generalized ring structures
            From: "Michael M. Gorman" <mmgorman@...>


____________________________________________________________________
____
____________________________________________________________________
____

Message: 1
    Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 09:20:55 -0800 (PST)
    From: "Thomas B. Cox" <tbcox23@...>
Subject: Re: generalized ring structures


Please explain a bit more and give some examples of what you mean by
"ring relationships" -- I've heard that phrase used in a variety of
ways.

Thanks.
  -Tom

--- tonnerdmhe <don.tonner@...> wrote:

> Hello
>
> I am searching for a generalized logical model for storing a
variety
> of ring relationships.  Does anyone know of any such models that
may
> have been published and are available on the web?
>
> Don Tonner
>



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250


____________________________________________________________________
____
____________________________________________________________________
____

Message: 2
    Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 12:04:26 -0600
    From: "Tonner, Don E" <don.tonner@...>
Subject: RE: generalized ring structures

I am looking for methods of generically storing hierarchies in a
generalized
model.  My main object type is 'Category'.  'Categories', if they
had
differentiating attributes, would be sub typed as Brand, Brand
Family, Retail
Groups, which themselves have relationships to other retail groups,
whose
subtypes would be Regional Group, Divisional Group, etc. The ring
relationships
is category to category, or if you refer to the subtypes
specifically, Retail
Group to retail group.

Two separate categories are described below:

A:
1. Brand may be organized into Brand Family.
2. Brand may belong to more than 1 Brand Family.
3. Brand Family may have more than 1 Brand.
B:
1. National Chain may be comprised of many Regional Group.
2. Regional Group may be comprised of many Divisional Group.
3. Division Group may be comprised of sub-divisional Group.
4. etc.
5. National Chain, Regional Group, Divisional Group and
Sub-divisional Group may
group Retail Establishment.
6. For one set of groups:
	 a) Retail Establishment may only exist once in all the
groups.
       b) group may not belong to more than 1 group (is a
consolidation
hierarchy, representing sales rollup, for example)
7. For different set of groups
	 a) Retail Establishment may exist in many groups.
       b) group may belong to many groups (my grouping, your
grouping, we all
have a grouping).

Don Tonner
EAM 5-6501
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas B. Cox [mailto:tbcox23@...]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 11:21 AM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Tonner, Don E
Subject: Re: [JCM] generalized ring structures


Please explain a bit more and give some examples of what you mean by
"ring relationships" -- I've heard that phrase used in a variety of
ways.

Thanks.
  -Tom

--- tonnerdmhe <don.tonner@...> wrote:

> Hello
>
> I am searching for a generalized logical model for storing a
variety
> of ring relationships.  Does anyone know of any such models that
may
> have been published and are available on the web?
>
> Don Tonner
>



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

   ----------



The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is
intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which it is
addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited.  If you
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
material from any computer.


[This message contained attachments]



____________________________________________________________________
____
____________________________________________________________________
____

Message: 3
    Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:38:24 -0500
    From: "Michael M. Gorman" <mmgorman@...>
Subject: RE: generalized ring structures

At 01:04 PM 1/31/2005, you wrote:
>I am looking for methods of generically storing hierarchies in a
generalized
>model.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The attached might help. We have single file hierarchies, multiple
file
hierarchies, and Bills-of-Materials in our metabase application.

Regards,
Mike Gorman


[This message contained attachments]



____________________________________________________________________
____
____________________________________________________________________
____


~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would you like to learn more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?

Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!

These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to
correctly model your business data requirements. Each day also
contains "hands on" labs where students practice the technique
while ORM-certified instructors give one-on-one assistance.

Custom on-site courses are also available.

For more information, please see
http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail
training@....
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Yahoo! Groups Links




--------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Hi Don,

Havent looked at Michaels attachements in detail but seems to cover
the most obvious tree structures.

You also mention sets (unordered nasties; difficult to intrinsicaaly
identify). This is a particular problem to ORM/FCO-IM for which I
would advise you to have a look at the following:

http://www.fcoim.nl/Literature_Article_FCO.html

(this article also discusses recursive identification: trees; but
especially the discussion of the game of quamsplash is very
interesting)===> these do NOT map to relational model! There you
have make use of various techniques the most important of which is
called baptizing (inventing new identification strategies).

Ton

I am looking for methods of generically storing hierarchies in a generalized
model.

I am looking for methods of generically storing hierarchies in a generalized
model.  My main object type is 'Category'.  'Categories', if they had
differentiating attributes, would be sub typed as Brand, Brand Family, Retail
Groups, which themselves have relationships to other retail groups, whose
subtypes would be Regional Group, Divisional Group, etc. The ring relationships
is category to category, or if you refer to the subtypes specifically, Retail
Group to retail group.

Two separate categories are described below:

A:
1. Brand may be organized into Brand Family.
2. Brand may belong to more than 1 Brand Family.
3. Brand Family may have more than 1 Brand.
B:
1. National Chain may be comprised of many Regional Group.
2. Regional Group may be comprised of many Divisional Group.
3. Division Group may be comprised of sub-divisional Group.
4. etc.
5. National Chain, Regional Group, Divisional Group and Sub-divisional Group may
group Retail Establishment.
6. For one set of groups:
	 a) Retail Establishment may only exist once in all the groups.
       b) group may not belong to more than 1 group (is a consolidation
hierarchy, representing sales rollup, for example)
7. For different set of groups
	 a) Retail Establishment may exist in many groups.
       b) group may belong to many groups (my grouping, your grouping, we all
have a grouping).

Don Tonner
EAM 5-6501
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas B. Cox [mailto:tbcox23@...]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 11:21 AM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Tonner, Don E
Subject: Re: [JCM] generalized ring structures


Please explain a bit more and give some examples of what you mean by
"ring relationships" -- I've heard that phrase used in a variety of
ways.

Thanks.
  -Tom

--- tonnerdmhe <don.tonner@...> wrote:

> Hello
>
> I am searching for a generalized logical model for storing a variety
> of ring relationships.  Does anyone know of any such models that may
> have been published and are available on the web?
>
> Don Tonner
>



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only for the
person(s) or entity/entities to which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this
information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is
prohibited.  If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete
the material from any computer.

Please explain a bit more and give some examples of what you mean by
"ring relationships" -- I've heard that phrase used in a variety of
ways.

Thanks.
  -Tom

--- tonnerdmhe <don.tonner@...> wrote:

> Hello
>
> I am searching for a generalized logical model for storing a variety
> of ring relationships.  Does anyone know of any such models that may
> have been published and are available on the web?
>
> Don Tonner
>



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

Hello

I am searching for a generalized logical model for storing a variety
of ring relationships.  Does anyone know of any such models that may
have been published and are available on the web?

Don Tonner

Andy,

I really appreciate both you and Pat taking the time to walk me through
the basics of CSDP. It's been interesting to see the two different
approaches that have been suggested. The concept of subtypes makes a lot
of sense to me.

In fact, trying to put these tips together into a cohesive conceptual
model has made me realize that I have a much more complex model than I
had initially imagined! Writing the examples was particularly helpful in
this regard. It reminded me of the practice of writing pseudo-code
before actually trying to write production code.

In the model presented below, I have used Pat's idea of overrides for
OptionSettings and your idea of subtypes for Record objects. I have
tried to follow your advice of avoiding equivocation. It's tough, esp
when dealing with a model with which you are not familiar!

The major problem that I'm seeing right now with this model is that I
have to query the database several times if an OptionSetting is not set
for a Record. That could simply be due to my lack of advanced SQL
knowledge. Any advice would be appreciated.

Fact Examples:
      "Print Statement Heading" has an agency and client scope
      User of group 'system_admin' sets "Print Statement Heading" to true
      User of group 'agency' sets "Print Statement Heading" for Client(BigCo
Client1) to true
      "Print Statement Heading" for Application is true
      "Print Statement Heading" for Agency(BigCo) is false
      "Print Statement Heading" for Client(BigCo Client1) is true
      "Max Days to Bump Rev" has an agency and client scope
      "Max Days to Bump Rev" for Application is 30
      "Max Days to Bump Rev" for Agency(BigCo) is 15
      "Max Days to Bump Rev" for Client(SmallCo Client1) is 25
      "Assign Debtor Number" has an agency scope
      "Assign Debtor Number" for Agency(BigCo) is true

      -- ERROR: This option cannot be set for a Collector Record--
      "Print Statement Heading" for Collector(BigCo Collector1) is false
      -- ERROR: This option cannot be set for a Client Record--
      "Assign Debtor Number" for Client(BigCo Client1) is 15
      -- ERROR: Global options cannot be set by a users of any group except
system_admin--
      User of group 'agency' sets "Print Statement Heading" to true

Conceptual scheme:
    Reference schemes:  Record(Id), ApplicationSetting(Code), OptionName(Name),
OptionSetting(Code), AllowedSettingScope(Code), User(Id)
    Base fact types:
                        F1 Record belongs to a RecordType { 'agency', 'client',
'collector', 'debtor' }
                        F2 Record belongs to Record
                        F3 Record overrides ApplicationSetting as OptionSetting
                        F4 ApplicationSetting has AllowedSettingScope { 'agency',
'client', 'collector', 'debtor' }
                        F5 ApplicationSetting has global- OptionSetting
                        F6 User belongs to a Record
                        F7 User has Group {'system_admin', 'agency_admin',
'agency_representative', 'client_admin', 'client_representative', 'collector'},
    Constraints:
                        C1 Each ApplicationSetting has a global OptionSetting
                        C2 A Record overrides at most one ApplicationSetting for
each OptionSetting
                        C3 User of group 'admin' can set ApplicationSetting that
has AllowedSettingScope 'application'
                        C4 User of group 'agency' can override an
ApplicationSetting that has AllowedSettingScope 'agency'
                        C5 User of group 'client' can override an
ApplicationSetting that has AllowedSettingScope 'client'
                        C6 User of group 'collector' can override an
ApplicationSetting that has AllowedSettingScope 'collector'
                        C7 No record is a parent of itself
    Derivation Rules:
                        D1 Record is a ClientRecord if it has RecordType 'client'
and belongs to Record with RecordType 'agency'
                        D2 Record is a CollectorRecord if it has RecordType
'collector' and belongs to Record with RecordType 'agency'
                        D3 Record is a DebtorRecord if it has RecordType 'debtor'
and belongs to Record with RecordType 'client'


Now, where this exercise begins to bear fruit is in turning it into a
database schema. The following is how I'm envisioning this structure to
be implemented (I don't have Visio to do this for me automatically). It
seems to be that the logical model for Record has more facts in it than
I'm showing in my conceptual schema. What do you think?

Logical Data Model (using pseudo-SQL statements):

   table Record (
     record_id int primary key,
     short_name varchar(10),
     parent_record_id varchar(50) references Record,
     name varchar(50),
     record_type {'admin', 'agency', 'client', 'collector', 'debtor'},
   );
   Ex: Rec_id   Short    Parent   Name                          Type
       1,      "Admin",   '',    "Enoch Root",                 "admin"
       2,      "BC",      '',    "BigCo",                      "agency"
       3,      "SC",      '',    "SmallCo",                    "agency"
       4,      "S100",    2,     "BigCo Client1",              "client"
       5,      "S200",    2,     "BigCo Client2",              "client"
       6,      "S100",    3,     "SmallCo Client1",            "client"
       7,      "C1",      2,     "BigCo Collector1",           "collector"
       8,      "C2",      2,     "BigCo Collector2",           "collector"
       9,      "C1",      3,     "SmallCo Collector1",         "collector"
       10,     "100",     4,     "BigCo Client1's Debtor1",    "debtor"
       11,     "101",     5,     "BigCo Client2's Debtor2",    "debtor"
       12,     "1000",    6,     "SmallCo Client1's Debtor1",  "debtor"

   table ApplicationSetting (
     application_setting_id int primary key,
     option_name varchar(50),
     option_setting varchar(255),
     setting_scope {'application', 'agency', 'client', 'collector', 'debtor'},
   );
   Ex: 1, "Print Statement Heading", "true", "application,agency,client"
       2, "Max Days to Bump Rev", "30", "application,agency,client"
       3, "Assign Debtor Number", "false", "agency,client"

   table ApplicationSettingOverride (
     application_setting_override_id int primary key,
     application_setting_id int references ApplicationSetting,
     record_id varchar(50) references Record,
     option_setting varchar(255),
   );
   Ex: 1, 1, 2, "false"
       2, 1, 4, "true"
       3, 2, 2, "15"
       4, 2, 3, "25"
       5, 3, 2, "true"

   SQL Examples:
     Retrieve the "Print Statement Heading" value for Record BigCo---
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=2;
     Retrieve the "Print Statement Heading" value for Record "BigCo Client1"---
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=4;
     Retrieve the "Print Statement Heading" value for Record "BigCo Client2"
[first query is empty]---
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=5;
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=2;
     Retrieve the "Print Statement Heading" value for Record "BigCo Client2's
Debtor1" [first and second query is empty]---
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=12;
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=5;
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSetting WHERE
application_setting_id=1;
     Retrieve the "Print Statement Heading" value for Record SmallCo [first query
is empty]---
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSettingOverride WHERE
application_setting_id=1 AND record_id=3;
       SELECT option_setting FROM ApplicationSetting WHERE
application_setting_id=1;

   table User (
     user_id varchar(50),
     record_id int references Record,
     group {'system_admin', 'agency_admin', 'agency_representative',
'client_admin', 'client_representative', 'collector'},
   );
   multi-column primary key on user_id and record_id
   Ex: "root",  1, system_admin
       "Admin", 2, agency_admin
       "Rep",   2, agency_representative
       "Admin", 1, client_admin
       "Rep",   1, client_representative
       "C1",    1, collector
       "C1",    2, collector






Thanks,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com

On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 08:18:38PM -0600, path wrote:
> It is useful to create example for each fact then you can get reading such
> as:
> Application Setting "Back Color" has Setting "Blue"
> User "1" overrides Application Setting "Back Color" as "Yellow"
> This is a ternary sentence with the (IU)
>  constraints over User and Application Setting
> That is a user can override the setting only once.

If I were to write out that constraint, would it look something like the
following:

   C1 User has at most one Application Setting


> The application could then see if the user has an overriding entry for the
> same application + application setting.

This is important!


> Always use examples while modeling. It makes it easier. It also makes it
> easier to present the model to others.

Good point that I'm quickly learning. See my recent message to Andy
which has some examples.


> The tool also will analyze examples and do the (IU) constraint for
> you.

I presume you mean visio when you say "tool". I'm using paper and pencil
for speed since I'm working mostly by myself.


> These sentences would allow you to add new settings without changing the
> database. It is a generalization of the specific sentences. There are a
> couple of possible other facts. Application has Application Setting.

Would I need the "Application has ApplicationSetting" fact if this is
only for a single application?


> You may want to indicate that the Application Setting can be
> overridden by the user or not.
> That would only be true if some application settings are not changeable.

Yes, that's exactly what I was trying to grasp in the message I just
wrote to Andy. I'm not sure how to write this though. Would it be a fact
or a constraint?

Let me try rewriting the reference scheme given your examples (please
revise as you see fit):

   Reference schemes:  ApplicationSetting(Code), OptionSetting(Code), User(Id)
   Base fact types:    F1 ApplicationSetting "PrintStatementHeading" has
OptionSetting "True"
                       F2 User "c1" overrides ApplicationSetting
"PrintStatementHeading" as OptionSetting "False"
   Constraints:        C1 User has at most one Application Setting
   Derivation Rules:   none



> Keep going you are doing well.

Thanks for your tips and support,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com

On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 02:47:41PM -0700, Andy Carver wrote:


> >> Yes, that's about right, although for F1 I'd probably say
> "ConfigurationOption has global- OptionSetting" to be clear that it is
> the global setting (the hyphen is necessary for correct verbalization by
> Visio, to attach the adjective to its noun (object type name)).

Boy, this is where ORM really begins to shine and where it's important
to be precise. By global setting I mean that some of the settings can
only be set globally. It's possible that some settings will also only be
settable for an individual.

Perhaps these are constraints but they are specific to a particular
group of settings. Ahh, there's the word I needed. I need to group my
settings into categories so that I can apply constraints to the
categories.

Given this explanation, would you still advise to use the global-
adjective in F1 ConfigurationOption has OptionSetting?





> >> I'm not quite clear on what you mean by "setting", in "OptionSetting
> has setting" -- I had been conceiving of OptionSetting itself as being
> the setting(s) given to some ConfigurationOption.

This is where I'm getting a bit confused. Let me use some examples
(which I should have put with the reference schemes):

       "Print Statement Heading" for System is true
       "Print Statement Heading" for Person(William) is false
       "Max Days to Bump Rev" for System is 30

       -- ERROR: This option cannot be set globally --
       "Assign Debtor Number" for System is true
       -- ERROR: Cannot set this option locally --
       "Max Days to Bump Rev" for Person(William) is 15

In these examples are the options in quotes an OptionSetting? I guess
they would be. I've therefore used your input and my revised reference
schemes would be as follows:

    Reference schemes:  ConfigurationOption(Code), OptionSetting(Code),
                         Person(Id), OptionLevel(Code)
    Base fact types:    F1 ConfigurationOption for OptionLevel has OptionSetting
    Constraints:        C1 ConfigurationOption and OptionSetting must belong to
the same group
    Derivation Rules:   none

    Reference schemes:  OptionSetting(Code), OptionLevel(Code)
    Base fact types:    F1 OptionSetting belongs to group OptionLevel
    Constraints:        C1
    Derivation Rules:   none

    Reference schemes:  OptionLevel(Code)
    Base fact types:    F1
    Constraints:        C1
    Derivation Rules:   none
    Examples:          'system', 'agency', 'client', 'collector'

In the reference scheme for OptionLevel, I'm not sure that anything more
is needed.


> >> Oh yes.  In fact, the first part of step 3 is to make you think about
> what generalizations like this you might need.

Ahh, good to know what's coming up.


Thanks,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com

William,

See my comments in-line, prepended by '>>'.

andy

-----Original Message-----
From: William McKee [mailto:william@...]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 8:56 AM
To: Andy Carver
Cc: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [JCM] Modeling software options with CSDP


On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 11:45:59AM -0700, Andy Carver wrote:
> I've never modeled this before, but hey, so what? With ORM any domain
> is doable!

Thanks for taking on the challenge.


> I'd say first that we must be clear on what the scope of this model
> is: Is it, as I'd suppose, the configuration options for only one
> instance
> (installation) of only one software product?

Yes, you are correct. I'm not managing configuration for multiple
installations, computers, etc.


> If so, I'd guess we're just saying something like
> "ConfigurationOption(Code) has global- OptionSetting(Code)" and
> "ConfigurationOption(Code) for Person(Id) has OptionSetting(Code)".
> There may be subtleties involved that I've not realized, but for the
> scope I've assumed, this seems the basic information needed.

OK, that makes sense. So to write this out as a conceptual schema would
look something like the following:

   Reference schemes:  ConfigurationOption(Code), OptionSetting(Code),
Person(Id)
   Base fact types:    F1 ConfigurationOption has OptionSetting
                       F2 ConfigurationOption for Person has
OptionSetting
   Constraints:        C1
   Derivation Rules:   none

>> Yes, that's about right, although for F1 I'd probably say
"ConfigurationOption has global- OptionSetting" to be clear that it is
the global setting (the hyphen is necessary for correct verbalization by
Visio, to attach the adjective to its noun (object type name)).

Next I'm going to need to allow some of the ConfigurationOption's to be
only set globally. I've tried to specify that in the following
conceptual schema. Does it make sense?

   Reference schemes:  OptionSetting(Code), SettingLevel(Code)
   Base fact types:    F1 OptionSetting has setting
                       F2 OptionSetting has SettingLevel
   Constraints:        C1
   Derivation Rules:   none

   Reference schemes:  SettingLevel(Code)
   Base fact types:    F1 SettingLevel has level
   Constraints:        C1
   Derivation Rules:   none

>> I'm not quite clear on what you mean by "setting", in "OptionSetting
has setting" -- I had been conceiving of OptionSetting itself as being
the setting(s) given to some ConfigurationOption.  Likewise I'm not
clear about "SettingLevel has level".  And I'm not clear how these
relate to your "need to allow some of the ConfigurationOption's to be
only set globally".  The latter inspired me rather to think of a subtype
of ConfigurationOption, called PersonallyConfigurableOption, which would
then take the place of the former in the ternary:
"PersonallyConfigurableOption for Person has OptionSetting".  That would
enforce the constraint that only personally configurable options get
personal settings.

Do you use conceptual schemas when defining elementray facts in step 1
of CDSP? Or do you just write out the facts? I find that I have to put
some effort into thinking in higher level abstractions like Person
instead of User/Administrator/Customer/Agent. Is this typical for
newcomers to ORM?

>> Oh yes.  In fact, the first part of step 3 is to make you think about
what generalizations like this you might need.


Thanks,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com

On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 11:45:59AM -0700, Andy Carver wrote:
> I've never modeled this before, but hey, so what? With ORM any domain is
> doable!

Thanks for taking on the challenge.


> I'd say first that we must be clear on what the scope of this model is:
> Is it, as I'd suppose, the configuration options for only one instance
> (installation) of only one software product?

Yes, you are correct. I'm not managing configuration for multiple
installations, computers, etc.


> If so, I'd guess we're just saying something like
> "ConfigurationOption(Code) has global- OptionSetting(Code)" and
> "ConfigurationOption(Code) for Person(Id) has OptionSetting(Code)".
> There may be subtleties involved that I've not realized, but for the
> scope I've assumed, this seems the basic information needed.

OK, that makes sense. So to write this out as a conceptual schema would
look something like the following:

   Reference schemes:  ConfigurationOption(Code), OptionSetting(Code), Person(Id)
   Base fact types:    F1 ConfigurationOption has OptionSetting
                       F2 ConfigurationOption for Person has OptionSetting
   Constraints:        C1
   Derivation Rules:   none


Next I'm going to need to allow some of the ConfigurationOption's to be
only set globally. I've tried to specify that in the following
conceptual schema. Does it make sense?

   Reference schemes:  OptionSetting(Code), SettingLevel(Code)
   Base fact types:    F1 OptionSetting has setting
                       F2 OptionSetting has SettingLevel
   Constraints:        C1
   Derivation Rules:   none

   Reference schemes:  SettingLevel(Code)
   Base fact types:    F1 SettingLevel has level
   Constraints:        C1
   Derivation Rules:   none


Do you use conceptual schemas when defining elementray facts in step 1
of CDSP? Or do you just write out the facts? I find that I have to put
some effort into thinking in higher level abstractions like Person
instead of User/Administrator/Customer/Agent. Is this typical for
newcomers to ORM?


Thanks,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com

-----Original Message-----
From: William McKee [mailto:william@...]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 12:32 PM
To: JCM
Subject: [JCM] Modeling software options with CSDP

Hi folks,

I am a software developer trying to learn more about database modeling
using CSDP and ORM. My desire to learn database modeling is to be a
better programmer. To this end, I have been reading Terry Halpin's
excellent book "Information Modeling and Relational Databases". So far,
I have read through step 1 and part of step 2 of the CSDP and am trying
to apply it to a new project.

While capturing facts, one of the first issues I've encountered, which
I'm not sure how to model, is software configuration options. These
options will work at a global and individual user level (users can
override some of the global options). I just don't see in my model what
entity to which these would belong or how that entity would relate to
the user or system (would there be a system entity?).

Please keep in mind that I'm working from the bottom-up; my experience
is more with writing SQL than writing use cases or capturing business
models. Any suggestions or pointers to further information would be most
appreciated.


Thanks,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com


~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would you like to learn more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?

Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!

These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to correctly model your business data requirements. Each day also contains "hands on" labs where students practice the technique  while ORM-certified instructors give one-on-one assistance.

Custom on-site courses are also available.

For more information, please see http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail training@....

Hi folks,

I am a software developer trying to learn more about database modeling
using CSDP and ORM. My desire to learn database modeling is to be a
better programmer. To this end, I have been reading Terry Halpin's
excellent book "Information Modeling and Relational Databases". So far,
I have read through step 1 and part of step 2 of the CSDP and am trying
to apply it to a new project.

While capturing facts, one of the first issues I've encountered, which
I'm not sure how to model, is software configuration options. These
options will work at a global and individual user level (users can
override some of the global options). I just don't see in my model what
entity to which these would belong or how that entity would relate to
the user or system (would there be a system entity?).

Please keep in mind that I'm working from the bottom-up; my experience
is more with writing SQL than writing use cases or capturing business
models. Any suggestions or pointers to further information would be most
appreciated.


Thanks,
William

--
Knowmad Services Inc.
http://www.knowmad.com

Hi Everyone,

We are proud to announce the release of version 1.5 of the Orthogonal
Toolbox a free add-on to Visio Professional 2002/2003 and Visio for
Enterprise Architects.

This new version adds the following enhancements and features:
(*) Bulk import of fact types into ORM Source Models
(*) Model element browser that displays element properties and can delete
most model elements
(*) Model selector to limit the open models you wish to export from/import
into/browse
(*) Sample XSLT for generating a XML schema (XSD) from a Database Model
Diagram
(*) Full integration with Microsoft Visio 2002/2003 Professional
(*) Various UI/XML schema enhancements

... to the existing features of version 1.0:
(*) XML export of the majority of the meta-model information contained in
the ORM Source Diagram
(*) XML export of much of the meta-model information contained in the
Database Model and ER Source Model Diagrams
(*) User selection of an XSLT style sheet to apply to the XML export
(*) User selection of model element types to be exported
(*) Full integration with Microsoft Visio 2002 for Enterprise Architects and
Microsoft Visio 2002/2003 Professional
(*) Corresponding XML schema definition
(*) Sample XSLT style sheet for formatting XML results as an HTML report

If you'd like to download your free copy, please visit
http://www.orthogonalsoftware.com/products.html.

FYI,
Scot.
..........................
Scot Becker

Orthogonal Software
www.orthogonalsoftware.com

Hi Gordon,

I see now what you were trying to do, sorry I didn't get you before.

One way to do this would be to make the fact type a 1:1 binary, optional
to "Department" objects, and with a value constraint {'y'} on the other
involved object type, "IsTopDepartmentCode" (or something like that).
See the attached diagram.  The U.C. on the latter object type's role
should be implemented with "IGNORE NULLS" semantics (unless you map it
to its own table to avoid nulls), i.e. as implemented it does not
restrict how many nulls show up in that column but it does restrict any
other values that show up there -- and the value constraint enforces
that only one other value can ever show up there.

This idea is based on Terry's suggestion of how to implement an
"open-world" unary (IMRD, Fig. 7.23, p. 297), to which I've added the
U.C. on the other role to make it 1:1.

Regards,
Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: Geverest@... [mailto:Geverest@...]
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 1:30 PM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Andy Carver
Subject: RE: [JCM] Frequency constraint on a Unary predicate


Andy (and say hi to Terry for me),
      The explicit "exactly one" you speak of does not make any sense to
me. Why would the (implicit) default for a unary predicate be that one
and only one member of the attached object population be allowed to play
that role? The case I am trying to model is a tree structure of say
organizational departments, where one and only one department is at the
top. I want to call that top one out, make it exclusive with the rest,
and have a disjunctive mandatory constraint on both roles. That way I
can say that for all the rest (except for the top dept) it is mandatory
that they report to a parent organizational unit.

Here is what I am trying to model in VisioEA
(assuming the graphic comes through for you,
otherwise, check out the attached .vsd file):

(Embedded image moved to file: pic19169.jpg)


Regarding your second comment,
I am unable to explicitly add this particular constraint in VisioEA. Try
it for yourself.  It behaves just as I described in my initial email.
-gord.e. (See attached file: P1 Dept ORM.vsd)





              "Andy Carver"

              <andy.carver@nort

              hface.edu>
To
                                        <jcm@yahoogroups.com>

              08/02/2004 10:32
cc
              AM


Subject
                                        RE: [JCM] Frequency constraint on
a
              Please respond to         Unary predicate

              jcm@...

                     om











There is already an implicit frequency constraint of "exactly one" on
any unary predicate, i.e., there's already an implicit functional
uniqueness constraint on the role, and the tool is apparently set up to
prevent making that constraint explicit. But you can use the "add
constraints" dialog to add the uniqueness constraint explicitly.

Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: geverest@... [mailto:geverest@...]
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 1:27 AM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [JCM] Frequency constraint on a Unary predicate

I am using VisioEA 2003 and am attempting to define a frequency
constraint on a unary predicate. I want to specify exactly one.  When I
leave the minimum at 1, and change the maximum from 2 to 1, the system
dims out the 'OK' button and I am unable to define that particular
frequency constraint. This would appear to be a bug in the system.
Anyone encountered this? -gord.everest

             Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
             Service.

I am using VisioEA 2003 and am attempting to define a frequency constraint
on a unary predicate.
I want to specify exactly one.  When I leave the minimum at 1, and change
the maximum from 2 to 1,
the system dims out the 'OK' button and I am unable to define that
particular frequency constraint.
This would appear to be a bug in the system.  Anyone encountered this?
-gord.everest



~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would you like to learn more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?

Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!

These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to correctly model your business data requirements. Each day also contains "hands on" labs where students practice the technique  while ORM-certified instructors give one-on-one assistance.

Custom on-site courses are also available.

For more information, please see http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail training@....

Hi Gordon,

> I am using VisioEA 2003 and am attempting to define a
> frequency constraint
> on a unary predicate.
> I want to specify exactly one.  When I leave the minimum at
> 1, and change
> the maximum from 2 to 1,
> the system dims out the 'OK' button and I am unable to define that
> particular frequency constraint.

That is because if every instance of a given object is supposed to
participate in a role and can participate in that role at most one time,
then those constraints are handled by mandatory and uniqueness respectively.

For unary predicates, the UC on the role is implied, so the at most one part
is intrinsically handled.

Further, since unary predicates are binary (i.e. Boolean), the absence of an
object in the role is presumed to be the false condition thereby you know
the population status (it is or it isn't) for every object instance.

If you want every object to always participate in a unary predicate, then it
is constant, and as such not handled by ORM predicates.

As an FYI, I recently wrote a quick bit about frequency constraints here:
http://objectrolemodeling.com/posts/239.aspx.

Hope that helps,
Scot.
..........................
Scot Becker

Orthogonal Software
www.orthogonalsoftware.com

I am using VisioEA 2003 and am attempting to define a frequency constraint
on a unary predicate.
I want to specify exactly one.  When I leave the minimum at 1, and change
the maximum from 2 to 1,
the system dims out the 'OK' button and I am unable to define that
particular frequency constraint.
This would appear to be a bug in the system.  Anyone encountered this?
-gord.everest

Allan,

We usually do not run the script from Visio "as is". Usually the script is
broken into separate files, based on what our DBAs want. We also take these
files are put them into a source management system such as Safe Source. Then
we apply the actual changes on a schedule that suits the project.

If you are running in a development environment this still applies - simply
edit the script placing the function earlier in the script. I still
recommend breaking the script into a set of related files and apply then in
the correct order.


Pat


-----Original Message-----
From: allan lindgren [mailto:allan_lindgren@...]
Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 3:01 PM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [JCM] VISIO DDL and functions

When using Visio for enterprise to generate the ddl from ER diagrams we are
having a problem when a column in a view references a function to be
declared in the model. Since the declare function scripts run after the
physical model generation for a ddl from Visio, this errors out. How can we
avoid this error?

Allan  Lindgren
mailto:allan_lindgren@...




~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would you like to learn more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?

Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!

These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to correctly
model your business data requirements. Each day also contains "hands on"
labs where students practice the technique  while ORM-certified instructors
give one-on-one assistance.

Custom on-site courses are also available.

For more information, please see
http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail
training@....
Yahoo! Groups Links

When using Visio for enterprise to generate the ddl from ER diagrams we are
having a problem when a column in a view references a function to be
declared in the model. Since the declare function scripts run after the
physical model generation for a ddl from Visio, this errors out. How can we
avoid this error?

Allan  Lindgren
mailto:allan_lindgren@...

I have been working on a ORM model that generates approximately 100
tables. VEA requires 3-4 hours to update the source model after I
modifying the Logical Diagram. Is there anything I can do to break my
model into smaller junks and still have relationships across all of the
individual models? Have other people experienced similar type of
performance issues?

Any help is much appreciated - Thanks,

Markus S. Gallagher.

Mark, Chang,

Thanks very much indeed for the info: we're sorted now.

BTW do you know if there is any chance of VEA being released as a separate
product at some time in the near future? I'm a freelance Data
Analyst/Architect and don't need all the VB and C++ stuff present in VSEA.

Once again, thanks for your help...

Chris Bruce
chris@...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Johnston, Mark" <mark.johnston@...>
To: <jcm@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 5:57 PM
Subject: RE: [JCM] VSEA and VisioModeler - Compatibility?


> Chris,
>
> Visio Enterprise Architect is a separate install, which can be
> found in the \Visio folder of the VSEA install disk.  Visio Enterprise
> Architect cannot open .IMO files directly, but facts from a VisioModeler
> .IMO file can be imported into an ORM Source drawing (Note: not an "ORM
> Diagram").  Use the Database->Import/Export->Import VisioModeler .IMO
> File menu choice.
>
> Similarly, VisioModeler .IMD files may be imported into a
> Database Model Diagram and .IML files may be imported into an ER Source
> Model.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> --Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Bruce [mailto:chris@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 1:36 AM
> To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [JCM] VSEA and VisioModeler - Compatibility?
>
> Hi All,
>
> A colleague has just had installed VSEA. She's trying, unsuccessfully,
> to read some .imo files produced by VisioModeler (VM). When they're
> opened some text (has, is of, etc., i.e. anything typed as predicates or
> notes) is visible but there's no signs of the graphical representation
> of the facts.
> We have no documentation other than that installed by the Service Desk
> from the CDs. There's no obvious signs of Visio for Enterprise
> Architects as a "startable" icon that I might have expected from a brief
> foray into orm.net and Microsoft's VSEA pages. My readings have
> concluded that the VM models are compatible with VSEA.
>
> What are we doing wrong? All help gratefully received. Ta!
>
> Chris Bruce
> chris@...
>
>
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Would you like to learn
> more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?
>
> Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!
>
> These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to
> correctly model your business data requirements. Each day also contains
> "hands on" labs where students practice the technique  while
> ORM-certified instructors give one-on-one assistance.
>
> Custom on-site courses are also available.
>
> For more information, please see
> http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail
> training@....
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Would you like to learn more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?
>
> Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!
>
> These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to correctly
model your business data requirements. Each day also contains "hands on"
labs where students practice the technique  while ORM-certified instructors
give one-on-one assistance.
>
> Custom on-site courses are also available.
>
> For more information, please see
http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail
training@....
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Chris,

	 Visio Enterprise Architect is a separate install, which can be
found in the \Visio folder of the VSEA install disk.  Visio Enterprise
Architect cannot open .IMO files directly, but facts from a VisioModeler
.IMO file can be imported into an ORM Source drawing (Note: not an "ORM
Diagram").  Use the Database->Import/Export->Import VisioModeler .IMO
File menu choice.

	 Similarly, VisioModeler .IMD files may be imported into a
Database Model Diagram and .IML files may be imported into an ER Source
Model.

	 Best wishes,

	 --Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Bruce [mailto:chris@...]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 1:36 AM
To: jcm@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [JCM] VSEA and VisioModeler - Compatibility?

Hi All,

A colleague has just had installed VSEA. She's trying, unsuccessfully,
to read some .imo files produced by VisioModeler (VM). When they're
opened some text (has, is of, etc., i.e. anything typed as predicates or
notes) is visible but there's no signs of the graphical representation
of the facts.
We have no documentation other than that installed by the Service Desk
from the CDs. There's no obvious signs of Visio for Enterprise
Architects as a "startable" icon that I might have expected from a brief
foray into orm.net and Microsoft's VSEA pages. My readings have
concluded that the VM models are compatible with VSEA.

What are we doing wrong? All help gratefully received. Ta!

Chris Bruce
chris@...




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/89EolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

~~~~~~ Sponsor's Message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Would you like to learn
more about Object-Role Modeling (ORM)?

Then check out InConcept's ORM Seminars!

These seminars will focus on the use of Object-Role Modeling to
correctly model your business data requirements. Each day also contains
"hands on" labs where students practice the technique  while
ORM-certified instructors give one-on-one assistance.

Custom on-site courses are also available.

For more information, please see
http://www.inconcept.com/training/ormseminar.html or e-mail
training@....
Yahoo! Groups Links

Hi All,

A colleague has just had installed VSEA. She's trying, unsuccessfully, to
read some .imo files produced by VisioModeler (VM). When they're opened some
text (has, is of, etc., i.e. anything typed as predicates or notes) is
visible but there's no signs of the graphical representation of the facts.
We have no documentation other than that installed by the Service Desk from
the CDs. There's no obvious signs of Visio for Enterprise Architects as a
"startable" icon that I might have expected from a brief foray into orm.net
and Microsoft's VSEA pages. My readings have concluded that the VM models
are compatible with VSEA.

What are we doing wrong? All help gratefully received. Ta!

Chris Bruce
chris@...

Does anyone know how to suppress the verbalization of Physical data types
on object domains in VisioEA (2003)?
It represents unnecessary information, not needed by the user domain
expert,
and should not be part of the verbalization of the conceptual ORM data
model.
If I remember correctly, it was possible to suppress through the definition
of Preferences in VisioModeler 3.1.
-gord.everest