RE: Core Components aggregate Analysis

[Bob Haugen <linkage@interaccess.com>]

A couple of comments on what I think might be the current
core component definitions, as evidenced by the spreadsheet
sent by Marianne Cockle with finance group comments.

I think the definition of Product/service may suffer from a common
conceptual problem, the lumping together of product definition and
product instance.  For example, the definition of an automobile
model (e.g. Flapmobile Deluxe Roadster) vs a particular instance
with a Vehicle Identification Number sold to a particular customer.
Or the definition of a food product with a SKU vs a particular
bunch of products on grocery shelves with Lot IDs.
Or a flightnumber vs a seat on a particular leg of a particular trip.
Or a room number vs a particular stay.

The BP Metamodel makes this distinction as 
EconomicResourceType vs EconomicResource (instances of
the type).  EconomicResource may be too abstract for
core components, but the distinction between type and 
instance may be necessary.  All ERP systems make the
distinction in one way or another - the type level is often
called "Master", e.g. "ProductMaster" vs "Inventory" or
"Lot".

Also, I fully agree with the finance group's comment about
differentiating Duration (a length of time) from DateTime,
a point in time.

Respectfully,
Bob Haugen