Hello fellow TMF members!I wonder if it is possible to combine characteristics of the object (like product) in groups. Like have group name of "DisplayName" and have multiple characteristics inside the group:
"internalName"/value"externalName"/value"some other name"/valueetc....?Thank you in advance.
Recently a new entity called feature has been introduced in the standard, which is used precisely to group characteristics. You can find it in most of the information models and APIs where the characteristic pattern is used. For instance, you can take a look at the service order resource of the TMF641 Service Order Management API.
Igor,To achieve grouping/combining of related characteristics, you can use product specifications.
You group characteristics together and then bundle product specifications together and link that bundle to a product offering. For instance:networkproductSpec ---> 4 characteristicsshippingSpec ----> 6 characteristicsproductInfoSpec -----> 10 characteristicsxxxxxSpec -----> xxx characteristics
finally, I bundle any of the above ProdSpec.
Abel,do you have a link from the TMF WIKI that explain the purpose of features? and will it be added in TMF620 V5?
Hi Matthieu,I don't see references to this entity other than those that appear in the APIs. The description there is not very clear either: Configuration feature. Anyway, seeing the data model it's quite clear that may be used to logically group characteristics.About your second question, as they appear in most of the other APIs, I guess that it's a matter of time before they also appear in this one. Perhaps @Jonathan Goldberghas more information.Regards,
Hello Abel/Matthieu,Thank you for the prompt feedback.Abel, are you referencing to this diagram?
Hi allFeature is not a group of characteristics, at least not to my understanding. It's meant to represent a coherent (well) feature in a network service that you can activate or deactivate, without going into the details of how the feature is implemented. It was introduced a while back in Resource, and more recently added to Service. I have no plans at present to add at Product layer, to do this we would need some concrete use cases.Regarding grouping of characteristics, I don't think that it is healthy to do it using product specifications - by going that way you are creating products in the inventory which may have no real semantic meaning as separate products.Can I suggest that people who want to have a logical group of characteristics, please give a business justification with real and realistic examples, so that the API team can consider whether to design such a solution. Also please state if it is needed only at spec level ("catalog") or also at instance level ("inventory").
I agree with you. altough I can't see a tangible business justification for adding a new entity. SID and API are already dense enough.The same outcome can be achieved with ProdSpecs (also documented in GB922 - Product)
I remembered Vance writing about it. I couldn't find his post, but I found this other informative discussion:characteristics vs features [...]
Here the example. It is CFS, but it doesn't matter for our discussion, it can be applied to any object:Object: ManagedService has two groups- ServiceConfiguraiton- RemarksServiceConfiguraiton group has characteristics:- ServiceCode- ServiceDescription.... etc...Remarks group has characteristics:- Type- DetailsIn addition - "groups" have cardinalities. For example, we may have zero or many remarks.Thanks,I can't really give you business inside on all of these fields, I was not part of the service design.
Not sure I understand why you need the group, what is the practical effect for consumers or providers of this information.
It doesn't have business meaning. It is just convenient way to present it to a user in UI.
Recently a new entity called feature has been introduced in the standard,