UCM Walldorf Notes UN/CEFACT Unified Context Methodology Project January

Consensus statements We agree we are not defining context values, but how to define values Architecture doc will not be an ODP document Glossary will be merged into the CEFACT glossary. UCM spec will only define terms specific to UCM We will converge Tony/Gunther + Scott metamodels which is the core of the stage 1 spec We want to accommodate “in context” and “having context” and will be defined in the glossary. Stage 1does not address the contextualized profile or contextual instance payload Stage 1 will provide a useful context methodology with completing ODP5 by year end 2009 which meet all requirements in the modeling dimension Relevancy Indicator to be merged into the stage 1 model We agree to have a UML Profile in stage 2 We will proceed with working the Tony/Gunther model with intention to provide a light weight consistent model in stage 2

Non-Consensus statements Not yet agreed Semantics of relevancy indicator is an important processing concept and requires examples Type of context value Datatype package in UML Reference leaf We plan on any grammar (textual expression such as e/BNF) as non- normative for It is not on critical path. Metamodel will be restructured to import the UML Profile for UCM

Key Modeling Topics Merge Scott’s model into Tony/Gunther model “Relevancy Indicator” on association In/having context “by value” or “by reference” Classifiable (Contextualizable ?) in profile and multiple “artifacts” Validity time attributes Type of the context value Datatype package(s) Non-optionality Model recursion as a DAG

Output Summary Reviewed inventory and identified consensus and non- consensus of the team Decided on staged content Stage 1 – Integrated current models Stage 2 – UML Profile and lightweight model Progressed integration of the models submitted Specification document initiated Established schedule goal of ODP5 exit by year end 2009 (stage 1 content) Presentation on UPCC to UCM team