dido:01-fdis-ra:02-background-and-motivation:02-3-the-role-of-sbrm:02-3-3-why-sbrm-alone-is-not-enough:start

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
dido:01-fdis-ra:02-background-and-motivation:02-3-the-role-of-sbrm:02-3-3-why-sbrm-alone-is-not-enough:start [2026/07/11 01:15] – created nick_didodido:01-fdis-ra:02-background-and-motivation:02-3-the-role-of-sbrm:02-3-3-why-sbrm-alone-is-not-enough:start [2026/07/18 12:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 3: Line 3:
 [[dido:01-fdis-ra:02-background-and-motivation:02-3-the-role-of-sbrm:start|Return to 2.3 The Role of SBRM]] [[dido:01-fdis-ra:02-background-and-motivation:02-3-the-role-of-sbrm:start|Return to 2.3 The Role of SBRM]]
  
-Although the Standard Business Report Model (SBRM) provides necessary [[fxdemo:99_part_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:s:semantic|semantic]] distinctions, SBRM does not, by itself, constitute an operational or architectural solution.+Although the Standard Business Report Model (SBRM) provides necessary [[dido:99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:s:semantic|semantic]] distinctions, SBRM does not, by itself, constitute an operational or architectural solution.
  
 Systems enact reporting semantics through processes, events, timing constraints, versioning mechanisms, validation workflows, parameters, and governance controls. These mechanisms determine: Systems enact reporting semantics through processes, events, timing constraints, versioning mechanisms, validation workflows, parameters, and governance controls. These mechanisms determine:
Line 18: Line 18:
 Without an explicit architectural framework, implementations may apply SBRM inconsistently, embed its distinctions implicitly within tools, collapse them into implementation-specific data structures, or bypass them in favour of expedient processing logic. Such treatment weakens comparability, traceability, auditability, and controlled semantic evolution. Without an explicit architectural framework, implementations may apply SBRM inconsistently, embed its distinctions implicitly within tools, collapse them into implementation-specific data structures, or bypass them in favour of expedient processing logic. Such treatment weakens comparability, traceability, auditability, and controlled semantic evolution.
  
-The Federated Data Interpretation Systems Reference Architecture (FDIS-RA) therefore situates SBRM within a coherent system-level [[fxdemo:99_part_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:r:reference_architecture|Reference Architecture]]. FDIS-RA identifies the components, responsibilities, boundaries, interfaces, governance mechanisms, and lifecycle controls needed to operationalise SBRM semantics across the reporting lifecycle, including:+The Federated Data Interpretation Systems Reference Architecture (FDIS-RA) therefore situates SBRM within a coherent system-level [[dido:99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:r:reference_architecture|Reference Architecture]]. FDIS-RA identifies the components, responsibilities, boundaries, interfaces, governance mechanisms, and lifecycle controls needed to operationalise SBRM semantics across the reporting lifecycle, including:
  
   * Evidence intake and custody   * Evidence intake and custody
Line 28: Line 28:
   * Analysis, reporting, and governed consumption   * Analysis, reporting, and governed consumption
  
-The Reference Architecture also provides the conceptual foundation for a formal architectural model expressed using SysML v2. In this role, SysML v2 supports representing semantic elements alongside architectural structure, behaviour, processing flows, events, triggers, constraints, interfaces, governance relationships, and traceability.+The Reference Architecture also provides the conceptual foundation for a formal architectural model expressed using SysML v2. In this role, SysML v2 supports representing semantic elements alongside architectural structure, behavior, processing flows, events, triggers, constraints, interfaces, governance relationships, and traceability.
  
-The SysML v2 model operates at the [[fxdemo:99_part_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:p:platform_independent_model|Platform-Independent Model (PIM)]] level. It expresses architectural responsibilities and constraints independently of particular technologies, products, deployment environments, or implementation mechanisms.+The SysML v2 model operates at the [[dido:99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:p:platform_independent_model|Platform-Independent Model (PIM)]] level. It expresses architectural responsibilities and constraints independently of particular technologies, products, deployment environments, or implementation mechanisms.
  
 The explanatory material in FDIS-RA provides context, motivation, and design rationale. The formally identified architectural requirements, interface definitions, constraints, models, and conformance provisions constitute the proposed normative response to the [[dido:00-sip-ra:start|Structured Information Processing Reference Architecture (SIP-RA) Request for Proposal]]. The explanatory material in FDIS-RA provides context, motivation, and design rationale. The formally identified architectural requirements, interface definitions, constraints, models, and conformance provisions constitute the proposed normative response to the [[dido:00-sip-ra:start|Structured Information Processing Reference Architecture (SIP-RA) Request for Proposal]].
  • dido/01-fdis-ra/02-background-and-motivation/02-3-the-role-of-sbrm/02-3-3-why-sbrm-alone-is-not-enough/start.1783757701.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2026/07/11 01:15
  • by nick_dido