Ongoing discussions within the SWIM communities of interest

Page tree

Ongoing discussions within the SWIM communities of interest

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Details

24 October 2019

Webex meeting


2Discussion on Understanding and recording mappings1005
3Discussion on Recording metadata required by the specification1100

Any other business


Comments received for Understanding and recording mappings

  • How many traces are sufficient/enough?
    • would it be helpful to give advice on how many traces are "ok"? Maybe something like "up to 5 traces" or so?
    • if there are too much traces needed maybe think about a change request?
    • Multiple traces: Conceptual vs. Logical Model - which to prefer?
  • Which structure (in terms of “logic”) has the order of multiple traces? Possible options (maybe also combinations):
    • from most necessary to least necessary  ("which trace is at least necessary for understanding the concept?")
    • from logical to technical ("what does the data contain - in which format does it come?")
    • from technical to logical ("which format does the data have - what does it contain?")
  • Difference between information and data concepts
    • How are they defined? Has a data concept a “higher priority” than an information concept (because of the second mandatory trace)?
    • Is everything at first an information concept and by adding a data type it becomes a data concept? How about using Attributes (like for urn:aero:airm:1.0.0:LogicalModel:Subjects:BaseInfrastructure:AerodromeInfrastructure:Aerodrome@locationIndicatorICAO)?
    • What if a concept implicitly contains a data type/format? (see CR49, this might come to a mapping for “METAR in IWXXM3” as a concept - is there an additional data type trace necessary?)
    • What if a data type trace is needed but there is no matching element in the AIRM? Or if there is a concept that contains implicitly a format that does not match with the service’s payload item?
  • Full example for tracing (end of "differentiating the traces"):
    • personally I would prefer the second option
    • reason: seems more structured, could better be differentiated from a possible mapping comment (like <comment>Here could be your comment.</comment>)

Any other business

  • is it possible to be aware of potential AIRM CRs outside the AIRM community?
    • maybe somebody just wants to build a service (e.g. a METAR service) but can't find an applicable trace. What does that person do? Is it really necessary to register at the AIRM community, review all CRs and decide if there is already a CR matching the issue?
    • Note: maybe add the need to join the AIRM community to the handbook to give better guidance on how to find the list of AIRM CRs. Promotes the avoidance of duplicate CRs.
  • Items for face-to-face
  • No labels