ISO/IEC JTC1/SC32/WG2-EM0112-013R2

                                                                                                                 Date: 2001-12-18

                                                                                  REPLACES: WG2-EM0112-013R1

Proposal to resolve several comments on clause 6

Source:  Ray Gates, based on original proposal from Frank Farance

Changes from WG2-EM0112-013R1

  1. Changed the level of some headings to make the clauses sub-ordinate to the "Conformance Levels" clause.
  2. Moved what was "Caveat" to the end as "Roles and Responsibilities for Registration"

Proposed replacement for Conformance Clause

Begin Text

6 Conformance

In this part of ISO/IEC 11179, "shall" is to be interpreted as a requirement on an implementation; conversely, "shall not" is to be interpreted as a prohibition.  If a "shall" or "shall not" requirement is violated, the behavior is undefined.  Undefined behavior is otherwise indicated in this part of ISO/IEC 11179 by the words "undefined behavior" or by the omission of any explicit definition of behavior.  There is no difference in emphasis among these three; they all describe "behavior that is undefined".

This part of ISO/IEC 11179 prescribes a conceptual model, not a physical implementation.  Therefore, the metamodel need not be physically implemented exactly as specified. However, it must be possible to unambiguously map between the implementation and the metamodel in both directions.

This part of ISO/IEC 11179 also prescribes a list of basic attributes for situation where a full conceptual model is not required or not appropriate.

Conformance may be claimed to the either the conceptual model, or the basic attributes or both.

6.1 Conformance levels

The following sub-clauses define strictly conforming implementations and conforming implementations.

6.1.1 Rationale

The distinction between "strictly conforming" and "conforming" implementations is necessary for addressing the simultaneous need for interoperability and the need for extensions.  Extensions are motivated by needs of users, vendors, institutions, and industries.

6.1.2 Strictly conforming implementations

A strictly conforming implementation:

1) shall support all mandatory, optional and conditional data element attributes and relationships;

2) shall not use, test, access, or probe for any extension features nor extensions to data element attributes;

3) shall not exceed limits nor smallest permitted maximum values specified by this part of ISO/IEC 11179; and

4) shall not interpret nor allow the production of data element attributes that are dependent on any unspecified, undefined, or implementation-defined behavior.

NOTE     The use of extensions to the metamodel or the basic attributes may cause undefined behavior.

6.1.3 Conforming implementations

A conforming implementation:

1) shall support all mandatory, optional and conditional data element attributes and relationships;

2) as permitted by the implementation, may use, test, access, or probe for extension features or extensions to data element attributes;

3) as permitted by the implementation, may exceed limits or smallest permitted maximum values specified by this part of ISO/IEC 11179; and

4) may interpret or allow the production of data element attributes that are dependent on implementation-defined behavior.

NOTE 1: All strictly conforming implementations are also conforming implementations.

NOTE 2: The use of extensions to the metamodel or the basic attributes may cause undefined behavior.

6.2 Roles and Responsibilities for Registration

Conformance needs to be considered in the context of the roles and responsibilities of registration authorities, as covered by ISO/IEC 11179-6: Registration of data elements.

Extended conformance of systems requires formalisation of procedures, agreement of roles and responsibilities between parties, and guidelines addressing use of software products and conversions from other systems. The formalisation of these aspects must be consistent with the conformance requirements in the above clauses, and roles of registration authorities as set out in ISO/IEC 11179-6.

End Text

Other changes required as a result of the changes to clause 6

The simplification of clause 6 results in several terms no longer being used.

The following terms and definitions should be deleted from clause 3:

The following terms and definitions are used elsewhere in the document, so need to be retained: