Issue #2-29: Relation, definition, explanatory text, etc. (Business Group)

(Feedback from Norway)

1. There is a constraint on Process Output that it must be at least one of Process Metric or Transformed Output. Is it totally inconceivable that it could just be a Process Execution Log? If you ran a process to check for errors and there were no errors then you would like to read that message in the log.
2. Are the definitions of Process Design and Process Step circular? They each refer to the other one.
3. Process Support Input
   1. Description of Role attribute has “(maybe external to allow more timely maintenance).” I don’t understand this part.
   2. Explanatory text for ”Examples of Process Support Inputs could include: - A Code List which will be used to check whether the Codes recorded in one dimension of a dataset are valid - An auxiliary Data Set which will influence imputation for, or editing of, a primary Data Set which has been submitted to the Process Step as the Transformable Input. In these examples, which Code List to use, or which auxiliary Data Set to use, may be specified via a Parameter Input. The details of the Code List or the auxiliary Data Set are Process Support Inputs.”  This was correctly quoted from LIM, but why would you use Parameter Input for this? It should be sufficient to just use Process Support Input. I suggest removing the last paragraph.
4. Definition of Statistical Program Cycle refers to Population, but it’s a very long way to navigate between these two. The Population has an attribute Reference Period. Statistical Program Cycle has Reference Period Start and Reference Period End. Isn’t this a redundancy?
5. Definition of Statistical Support Program is terrible ☹
6. Copied from my Base Group comment #2: We are puzzled by the three new ‘refers to’ associations. Maybe the descriptive text for Transformed Output, Transformable Input and process Support Input need to be updated to explain these associations to Identifiable Artefact. I assume that these three information objects are all Identifiable Artefacts. If that is the case then what Identifiable Artefacts are they referring to? Does the Transformed Output refer to the Transformable Input and vice versa? What does the Process Support Input refer to – itself? The Process Step that it is supporting? Same as 2 of Issue #2-26 Clickable issues (Base Group)
7. (Moved from Issue #2-26) Do Assessment and Change Definition need to be shown specifically here? 
   1. Isn’t Assessment a type of Transformable Input /Transformed Output. It could be input from the previous production cycle and added to under the entire new production process. It could be input from the previous subprocess and updated in the current subprocess.
   2. Change Definition is the output of a process in which Statistical Need is the input. Thereafter it could be a Process Support Input or it could be updated (transformed) underway as a need for greater precision is required and acquired. 
   We cannot see that Assessment and Change Definition are special information objects that need to be shown explicitly.

Resolved issues (UNECE)

8. In the Base Group the cardinality on the Identifiable Artefact side of the relationship to Transformed Output is 1. This should be added in the Business Group diagram. Clickable diagrams ought to be generated from Sparx EA and not manually entered in order to avoid this type of inconsistency and the need for manual checking.

9. The cardinality on the Process Design end of the relationship to Business Service is hidden by the white diamond above. More space!

10. There is a cardinality (0…*) on the end of the loop on Process Step but it is missing from the start of the loop. Note this is also missing in the Clickable Process Step and should also be added there.

11. Looking at the definition of the Business Service “A means of performing a Business Function (an ability that an organization possesses, typically expressed in general and high level terms and requiring a combination of organization, people, processes and technology to achieve).” It seems as if everything in the brackets ought to be moved to the definition of Business Function that currently reads “ Something an enterprise does, or needs to do, in order to achieve its objectives.” If not in the definition for Business Function, then perhaps in the explanatory text.

12. In Explanatory Text for Process Output Specification “if five different Process Outputs expected” should be “if five different Process Outputs are expected”

13. In Definition of Process Step Instance “outputs from for an” should be “outputs from an”

14. In Explanatory text for Transformable Input and for Transformable Output “statistical business process” should be “statistical Business Process”.

15. Looking at the Explanatory Text for Process Metric “Often these two kinds of Process Metrics will be used in combination when seeking to, for example, monitor and tune a statistical business process so its statistical outputs achieve the highest level of quality possible based on the time, staff and/or IT resources that are available.” This should be replaced by “Often these two kinds of Process Metrics will be used in combination when seeking to, for example, monitor and tune a statistical Business Process so its Process Outputs achieve the highest level of quality possible based on the time, staff and/or IT resources that are available.