You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This viewpoint explicitly does not cover the relationship of standards to model parts, i.E. to what does the standard apply ?
E.g. there may be an interface standard applying only to few interfaces.
Should this be a separate viewpoint or should it be put into the definition viewpoint ?
help wantedExtra attention is neededquestionFurther information is requested
1 participant
Heading
Bold
Italic
Quote
Code
Link
Numbered list
Unordered list
Task list
Attach files
Mention
Reference
Menu
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
We have now a standards definition viewpoint generated from the model.
A development view on the VP is now available
The VP is based on michaels proposal.
This viewpoint explicitly does not cover the relationship of standards to model parts, i.E. to what does the standard apply ?
E.g. there may be an interface standard applying only to few interfaces.
Should this be a separate viewpoint or should it be put into the definition viewpoint ?
What do you think ?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions