Concept Model Rename "logical" elements to "conceptual" when appropriate

[haarer]

During Kassel Workshop we had the discussion about the meaning of logical (again)
The term logical should be only used for the conceptual white box view of SAF, some of the concept model elements are called logical despite they describe context.

FIX: rename entities
Most of them are shown here:
https://github.com/GfSE/SAF-Specification/blob/main/developing-saf/concept/SAF_context_F%20Definition.md

I propose to use the term functional - since they appear only in viewpoints of the functional domain,
but if someone has a better idea - please make a suggestion

[parkaneric]

The scope and names of the SAF domain are IMO not self-explaining. I understood that the domain definitions have some history. Without knowing the history, new SAF users are confused. E.g.:
"Why are Logical Context Elements / SOI are exposed in the Logical Domain?"
"Why is System Functional Refinement in the Functional and Logical Internal Interaction Viewpoint in the Logical Domain?"

I'd like to propose a more radical approach:

• re-organize the Functional / Logical Domain to Conceptual Domain (Blackbox and Whitebox VPs highlighted)
• rename Physical to Technical Domain (so that we would have a Operational, Conceptual and Technical Domain)?

What do you think?

[haarer]

Am 19. Dezember 2024 08:45:58 MEZ schrieb Eric Parkan ***@***.***>:

The scope and names of the SAF domain are IMO not self-explaining. I understood that the domain definitions have some history. Without knowing the history, new SAF users are confused. E.g.: "Why are Logical Context Elements / SOI are exposed in the Logical Domain?" "Why is System Functional Refinement in the Functional and Logical Internal Interaction Viewpoint in the Logical Domain?" I'd like to propose a more radical approach: - re-organize the Functional / Logical Domain to Conceptual Domain (Blackbox and Whitebox VPs highlighted) - rename Physical to Technical Domain (so that we would have a Operational, Conceptual and Technical Domain)? What do you think? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #59 (comment) You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: ***@***.***>

I agree fully. -- Gruß, Alexander