Specification a new SAF Physical System Taxonomy & SAF Physical Interface Taxonomy Viewpoint about saf-specification HOT 7 CLOSED

from saf-specification.

From the PR, i understand this is about generalizations for the system Blocks used in the structure viewpoints, correct ?

So the only new concept would be the generalization "Reuse" ?

Do you have the Idea how to capture the "what must be Changed" ?

I believe you want to add two viewpoints, one fit the LD and one for the PD, with similar concerns.

from saf-specification.

The physical of these viewpoints could also capture top Level taxonomy Elements Like e.g. "hardware Item" with weight value properties and so on.

from saf-specification.

From the PR, i understand this is about generalizations for the system Blocks used in the structure viewpoints, correct ?

So the only new concept would be the generalization "Reuse" ?

Do you have the Idea how to capture the "what must be Changed" ?

I believe you want to add two viewpoints, one fit the LD and one for the PD, with similar concerns.

Indeed. I want to enhance reusability (specialisation) from a reference architecture or a library as a preliminary step before defining the structure. Thus we keep the Structure Viewpoint clean and simple. Incidentally tayloring from reference architecture or library to Project goes into the new Viewpoint. The generalisations within a project should also go into the new Viewpint for best consistency.
The purpose of the logical Taxonomy Viewpoint is to reuse logical elements (Ideas, solutions, etc)
The purpose of the physical Taxonomy Viepoint is to reuse refernce and library phiscal solutions.

from saf-specification.

The physical of these viewpoints could also capture top Level taxonomy Elements Like e.g. "hardware Item" with weight value properties and so on.

Yup. There are many subjects That benefit from a Taxonomy Viewpoint. In addition to the obvious ones like logical and physical systems and interfaces, that you want to specialize from a reference architecture, you may want to define a taxonomy of functions given that you pull functions from a library. You may want to have a taxonomy of actors, verifications, analysis or constrains too. Having a Viewpoint for the taxonomy let you bring all these topics under one roof.

from saf-specification.

I agree. I meant to begin with a logical and a physical taxonomy for systems and interfaces. We could follow through with actors, functions,...

from saf-specification.

Interessant wäre es, die entsprechenden Bezüge / Aktivitäten m SE HB v5 zu zitieren.
The Logical/ Physical Taxonomy Viewpoint supports the “reuse of COTS” activity of the INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING HANDBOOK 2015 [§4.5.1.4], the “adaptation of system elements” activity of the INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING HANDBOOK 2015 [§4.7.2.1], and the “potential to justify the setting up of the evolution of a product line organization” activity of the INCOSE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING HANDBOOK 2015 [§ 8.3.1].

from saf-specification.