Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reasons for Equivalent classes #44

Open
igrangel opened this issue Jul 26, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

Reasons for Equivalent classes #44

igrangel opened this issue Jul 26, 2018 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@igrangel
Copy link
Contributor

The class ISO_42010_ArchitectureDescription is declared as owl:equivalentClass to the sto:StandardizationFramework, @sebbader, could you please explain which is the rationale behind this?

@igrangel igrangel changed the title Reason for Equivalent classes Reasons for Equivalent classes Jul 26, 2018
@sebbader
Copy link
Collaborator

The statements for sto:ISO_42010_ArchitectureDescription and sto:ISO_42010_Viewpoint are a first idea to map the classifications and frameworks to ISO_42010 concepts. I am not yet sure if they are really equal in the terms of owl:equivalentClass but need some type of relation.

@igrangel
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can you link here the existing documents where the standard is explained? The source you utilized to define these classes.

@sebbader
Copy link
Collaborator

The official source . You can get a PDF from here.

@igrangel
Copy link
Contributor Author

According to the official source, an Architecture description is defined as follows: "An architecture description shall identify the system-of-interest and include supplementary information as
determined by the project and/or organization. " The sto:StandardizationFramework aims to define existing Standardization Frameworks, e.g., RAMI, IIRA, but also, the Administration Shell. The idea here is to categorize any existing categorization of standards. So, I think it may be an upper concept than the Architecture description. Please, provide your opinion here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants