switch link direction between feat and log_arc_int - #754
switch link direction between feat and log_arc_int#754RolandJentschETAS wants to merge 7 commits into
Conversation
|
The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are much more images to be updated, please do not forget them, e.g.
https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/pr-754/general_concepts/score_building_blocks_concept.html#deployment-example
Check also, https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/pr-754/general_concepts/score_traceability_concept.html, if there is no left-over
There was a problem hiding this comment.
another one is in https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/main/process_areas/architecture_design/guidance/architecture_process_reqs.html#gd_req__arch_build_blocks_corr
and when you are at it, please check if the optional "includes" link from logic_arc_int to logic_arc_int_op makes sense? wouldn't this be added automatically as back-link?
From @RolandJentschETAS : That's independent of the current change. Can we discuss it separate ? For example in the next process meeting, because that shows the current state in docs_as_code meta model.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The other 2 pictures are also changed.
The traceability pictures does not contain the logical interface. Therefore they are fine.
The requirement picture is now also changed.
The "logic_arc_int to logic_arc_int_op" is the current state in the metamodel of docs as code. So both are defined independently. At this time when the picture was updated, I added the status quo of the yaml. I propose to discuss this independently from the current PR, because the link direction concept is not clear for me. The link itself is used in the launchmanager for the lifecycle interface.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But fulfills is now optional, must be removed here,
https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/main/general_concepts/score_building_blocks_concept.html#hint-for-tool-implementation
that images shows only mandatory links
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no access to this link ... But it is the simplified picture ? Have done it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
aschemmel-tech
left a comment
aschemmel-tech
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
checked for completeness, found one additional place to modify
There was a problem hiding this comment.
another one is in https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/main/process_areas/architecture_design/guidance/architecture_process_reqs.html#gd_req__arch_build_blocks_corr
and when you are at it, please check if the optional "includes" link from logic_arc_int to logic_arc_int_op makes sense? wouldn't this be added automatically as back-link?
From @RolandJentschETAS : That's independent of the current change. Can we discuss it separate ? For example in the next process meeting, because that shows the current state in docs_as_code meta model.
Fixed |
3 participants
This pull request updates the documentation and requirements to standardize the use of the
included_byattribute for linking features and logical architectural interfaces, replacing the previous use ofincludes. It also updates related guidance and limitations to reflect this change.Attribute linking and documentation updates:
Logical Interfacessection inarchitecture/index.rstto add the:included_by:attribute, clarifying the link from features to logical interfaces.:includes:attribute from theAbstractsection infeature_name/index.rstto align with the new linking approach.:includes:attribute from the rendered feature example section inarchitecture_concept.rstfor consistency.architecture_concept.rstto mention that theincluded_byattribute is now in use, in addition toincludes,uses, andimplements.Guidance and requirements update:
architecture_process_reqs.rstto require that interfaces are linked to features via theincluded_byattribute, instead ofincludes, for consistency in interface-feature relationships.