<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1650548831;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:821170764 1326187048 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:54.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:90.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
margin-left:126.0pt;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:162.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:198.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
margin-left:234.0pt;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:270.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:306.0pt;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
margin-left:342.0pt;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Dear All,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>In our last telecon, there were a number of updates agreed and actions placed on me to propose updates.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have uploaded a new version of the model to google docs as MPS Information Model Draft D (in both Enterprise Architect and RTF Report formats), which includes the agreed updates and proposals.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Some explanation for proposed changes resulting from actions follows below.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Best regards,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Roger<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>Global Constraints / Request Subtypes<o:p></o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal>We agreed to consider options for representation of Global Constraints:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>Global Constraints<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>This will be considered off-line.<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>Renaming is OK, but it is to be considered off-line how to represent Global Constraints. Two proposals were made:<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>1. There should be a single Global Constraints collection to which Constraints can be added or deleted.<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>2. There should be a sub-type of Request to represent persistent standing orders or rules. This could contain Constraints - equivalent to the Global Constraint. It could also be used to express the instantiation of an Activity in response to an Event.<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have looked into this and concluded that Option 2 is more flexible. In practice, the existing representation of Planning Requests already provides the means to specify both Global Constraints and Standing Orders (the latter using Repetitions):<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>However, there are three distinct use case that would require constrained usage of the current attribute set:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>1.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]>A one-shot “single” request may have constraints and a set of Activity Details – it <i>may </i>include [limited] repetition that allows a series of activities to be planned.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>2.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]>A standing order request may have constraints and a set of Activity Details, that must at the root comprise an [unbounded] repetition.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>3.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]>A Global Constraint is a standing order that has no Activity Details, only constraints.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have updated the model to reflect 3 sub-classes of Request as above:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-GB'><img width=1140 height=800 id="_x0000_i1028" src="cid:image001.png@01D41DF3.740DD8F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>It is noted that currently Request Template/Instance has a set of Activity Details, but a single Constraint Node.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Currently, Repetitions can only contain a single Activity Detail (which itself can have children). This means a standing order cannot invoke multiple root activities in response to the same trigger time/position/event.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If instead we allowed Repetitions to contain a set of Activity Details, then we could replace the Activities set by a Repetition in much the same way as we have a single Constraint Node for the constraints. This would make the one-shot and standing order cases look the same – the Repetition becoming the equivalent of the Constraint Node. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have also deleted the Global Constraint classes as it is no longer needed.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>Planning Activities<o:p></o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>It was proposed that a common structure should be defined that defines the Trigger (or Trigger Reference) for an Activity in the Activity Update. This may be Time-based, Position-based or a Planning Event reference. This will be considered off-line and a proposal made for discussion by the WG.<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Previously we had Start and End Time plus Start and End Position for all Activity Updates.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I propose replacing this with a combination of an Activity Trigger and a Duration.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The Activity Trigger structure has three subtypes as follows:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-GB'><img width=670 height=262 id="Picture_x0020_2" src="cid:image005.png@01D41DF3.740DD8F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Start Time is always present – it may be the actual planned Start Time of the Activity (for a Time Trigger), or the predicted time for other sub-classes. Once the Activity has actually been triggered by Plan Execution it will contain the actual Start Time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Nothing else is required for a Time Trigger – the end-time can be derived from Start Time + Duration.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>For a Position Trigger, the Start Position is given. I have not included an End Position, as it does not seem necessary – but it could be added.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>For an Event Trigger, a reference to the Trigger Event is given, together with a Time Offset.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>It should, however, be noted that Position and Event Triggers may effectively be resolved to Time at any stage in a distributed planning system. Event Triggers are normally only necessary if the Event is updated/detected downstream of the Planning function that generates the Plan – linkage to the Event is already provided in the Activity Instance through the Related Event.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>Data Validation on Argument Values<o:p></o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>The WG concluded that data validation on Argument values is needed. RT will propose an approach to extend the Argument Definition to support this.<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>See extension to Argument Definition below:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-GB'><img width=1065 height=576 id="Picture_x0020_3" src="cid:image008.png@01D41DF3.740DD8F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>This is similar to the approach on Resources, except that these used resource profiles that had evolution over time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Question: should Status type arguments be supported?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>Argument Constraints<o:p></o:p></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><i>It was also proposed that there should be the possibility to express constraints on the value of an Argument of a referenced object (Event or parent Activity). We do not currently have a constraint type that supports this, but this could look very similar to Resource Constraints. RT will consider and propose a solution to the WG.<o:p></o:p></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Additional Constraint Type added to support constraints on Argument Value. This follows the pattern of the Simple Resource Constraint.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Note that the referenced Object will typically be the current Object “Me”, its parent “Source” or another related object e.g. “Related Event”.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-GB'><img width=800 height=254 id="Picture_x0020_5" src="cid:image011.png@01D41DF3.740DD8F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>