I'd like to give some feedback on the document that's slated for the Release 1.0.2 Specifications.
1) The subsection 'Support Information Model' states that it includes the special package 'assumed_types'. However, in Figure 10, the package 'support' and 'assumed types' are drawn separately. So I think 'assumed types' should be cut and pasted into the 'support' package.
2) In Figure 10, in the 'data_types' package, the package 'quantity' contains a package 'date_time'. It looks to me as if 'date_time' should be a sibling package of 'quantity'. Furthermore, the package 'time_specification' probably belongs in the package 'date_time'. It would be also nice when looking at the package 'data_types' that the order of the packages from left to right would be the same as the order of the list in the subsection 'Data Types Information Model'. That list forgets to mention the package 'uri'.
3) In the subsection 'Common Information Model' out-of-the-blue the classes LOCATABLE, ARCHETYPED, ATTESTATION, and PARTICIPATION are mentioned. I don't think this subsection should already zoom in at the classes-level, but focus on the higher level packages. In that respect, currently only the inner package 'change_control' is treated in this subsection.
4) The package 'composition' is shown in Figure 10, but not explained 5.2.1, and vice versa, 'Workflow Information Model (future)' does not have an accompanying outer package in Figure 10.
Minor
I'd like to give some feedback on the document that's slated for the Release 1.0.2 Specifications.
1)
The subsection 'Support Information Model' states that it includes the special package 'assumed_types'. However, in Figure 10, the package 'support' and 'assumed types' are drawn separately. So I think 'assumed types' should be cut and pasted into the 'support' package.
2)
In Figure 10, in the 'data_types' package, the package 'quantity' contains a package 'date_time'. It looks to me as if 'date_time' should be a sibling package of 'quantity'. Furthermore, the package 'time_specification' probably belongs in the package 'date_time'. It would be also nice when looking at the package 'data_types' that the order of the packages from left to right would be the same as the order of the list in the subsection 'Data Types Information Model'. That list forgets to mention the package 'uri'.
3)
In the subsection 'Common Information Model' out-of-the-blue the classes LOCATABLE, ARCHETYPED, ATTESTATION, and PARTICIPATION are mentioned. I don't think this subsection should already zoom in at the classes-level, but focus on the higher level packages. In that respect, currently only the inner package 'change_control' is treated in this subsection.
4)
The package 'composition' is shown in Figure 10, but not explained 5.2.1, and vice versa, 'Workflow Information Model (future)' does not have an accompanying outer package in Figure 10.