1. International Telecommunication Union ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 New Recommendations on ODP Arve Meisingset Rapporteur Q15

2. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 2 dates Two Parts o Rev Rec. X.911 for Consent Enterprise Language o Draft X.906 for review and comments Use of UML for ODP system specifications

3. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 3 dates Part I o X.911 Enterprise Language Ad. 1  Rev. Rev + Annex A and B

4. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 4 dates Enterprise Viewpoint o An enterprise specification of an ODP system is a description of that system and relevant parts of its environment. o The enterprise specification focuses on the scope and purpose of that system and the policies that apply to it in the context of its environment.

5. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 5 dates Enterprise Language o Concepts, o structures, and o rules for o developing, representing, and reasoning about o a specification of an ODP system from the enterprise viewpoint

6. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 6 dates System Concepts

7. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 7 dates Community and Behav. Concepts

8. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 8 dates Accountability Concepts

9. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 9 dates Policy Concepts

10. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 10 dates Viewpoint correspondences The specifier shall provide: – for each enterprise object in the enterprise specification, a list of those information objects (if any) that represent information or information processing concerning the entity represented by that enterprise object; – for each role in each community in the enterprise specification, a list of those information object types (if any) that specify information or information processing of an enterprise object fulfilling that role; ETC. to inf., comp. and engin. viewpoints

11. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 11 dates Annex B Examples o e.com o Library

12. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 12 dates Questions o Is URN an Enterprise Language? o May SDL and MSC be used to specify an Enterprise Viewpoint? o May eODL be used to specify every correspondence between Viewpoints? o Have we done enough to position the ITU languages? o Have we ensured compliance? o Is ODP relevant for ITU?

13. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 13 dates Part II o Committee Draft o X.906 Use of UML for ODP system specifications o The RM-ODP family of standards is notation free, as well as model development method free. o There is no widely agreed approach to the structuring of UML specifications. o ISO/IEC 19501 is technically identical to the OMG specification formal/03-02-04, UML 1.4.1 - ISO format. o As an example, the UML Profile for EDOC (using the UML extensions mechanism) provides a bridge between the RM-ODP architecture for distributed systems and specific technologies, such as components, workflow, messaging, and web services.

14. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 14 dates Scope a) the expression of a system specification in terms of RM-ODP viewpoint specifications using defined UML concepts and extensions (e.g. structuring rules, technology mappings, etc.); b) relationships between the resultant RM-ODP viewpoint specifications; c) relationships between RM-ODP viewpoint specifications and model driven architectures such as the OMG MDA.

15. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 15 dates Relationships between UOD, ODP specifications, and UML models

16. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 16 dates RM-ODP viewpoints

17. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 17 dates Correspondences between RM-ODP viewpoints

18. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 18 dates MDA viewpoints and models o a computation independent viewpoint (CIM) that focuses on the requirements for the system; the details of the system are hidden or as yet undetermined; o a platform independent viewpoint (PIM) that focuses on the application specific behaviour of a system while hiding the details necessary for a particular platform. A platform independent view shows the part of the complete specification that does not change from one platform to another. A platform independent view may use a general purpose modelling language, or a language specific to the area in which the system will be used; o a platform specific viewpoint (PSM) that combines the platform independent viewpoint with an additional focus on the detail of the use of a specific platform by a system.

19. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 19 dates ODP system specifications and MDA models

20. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 20 dates Enterprise Language See part I plus details, eg.

21. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 21 dates Enterprise Language 7.2 UML mappings o An ODP System is a special kind of enterprise object. It maps to UML with a class stereotyped as « EV_ODPSystem », see [7.2.5]. o The scope of an ODP system is the set of behaviours that the system is expected to exhibit, e.g. its roles. It does not, therefore, map to a single UML model element, but to the set of elements that represent its behaviour. o The field of application is a property of the enterprise specification as a whole, and maps to a text attribute (comment) of the UML model stereotyped as « Enterprise_Spec » which maps to the enterprise specification. o A community maps to a subsystem stereotyped as « EV_Community », in the name space of which will be the UML model elements mapping to its roles and the associated behaviour (communications, actions, steps and processes), as well as the UML model elements mapping to the policy and accountability concepts specific to the community. o ETC

22. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 22 dates Enterprise Language 7.3 UML profile

23. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 23 dates Information Language Concepts

24. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 24 dates Computational Language Concepts

25. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 25 dates Computational Language Coreography

26. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 26 dates Computational Language Composition

27. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 27 dates Data Document model

28. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 28 dates Computational language Model management

29. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 29 dates Engineering language Basic concepts

30. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 30 dates Engineering language Channels

31. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 31 dates Engineering language Identifiers

32. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 32 dates Engineering language Checkpoints

33. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 33 dates Logical and physical viewpoints

34. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 34 dates Engineering Language Engineering objects

35. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 35 dates Engineering Language Clusters and capsules

36. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 36 dates Engineering Language Domains

37. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 37 dates Engineering Language Nodes, components and objects

38. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 38 dates Engineering Language Distribution tiers

39. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 39 dates Technology Language Model

40. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 40 dates Annex B Example specification

41. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 41 dates Strategic Questions profile UML ODP ITU ? Is UML just used as a meta-language – like BNF? Are ITU and ODP languages compeeting? Have they overlapping application domains? Should ITU and ODP lamguages be better co-ordinated?

42. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 42 dates Data Questions Is ASN.1 least affected? Should ASN.1 be extended by class diagrams? Is ODP Information viewpoint too weak for a Data architecture? Layout Schema Contents Schema External Terminology Schema Concept Schema Internal Terminology Schema Distribution Schema Physical Schema

43. ITU-T ITU-T Study Group 17, Moscow, 30 March – 8 April 2005 43 dates Repetitions and Refinements Questions o Is URN an Enterprise Language? o May SDL and MSC be used to specify an Enterprise Viewpoint? o Do SDL and MSC qualify as Computational languages? o May eODL be used to specify every/any correspondence between Viewpoints? o Have we done enough to position the ITU languages within ODP? o Have we ensured compliance? o Is ODP relevant for ITU?