I am not saying something different, I am just being more specific.
If you want to define ServicePoint as a managed resource, you need to build on solid available ground. Thus, the recommendation to build on the existing GeographicSite API (ServicePoint as strongly-typed extension of GeographicSite), with its existing resource model, exposed by an existing ODA Component.
If you don't (ServicePoint as strongly-typed extension of Place), you have to rebuild everything by yourself.
Now, it's just my opinion and recommendation. As said in my initial reply, I have seen this concept being represented in multiple ways.
Original Message:
Sent: Oct 08, 2025 05:39
From: Matthieu Hattab
Subject: TMF equivalent of our concept "ServicePoint"
when we implemented 645, we were advised by TM forum (I forgot his name but we had a workshop with a French Canadian on this topic) to use polymorphism for place.
The rationale was that PlaceReforValue exist in all TMF APIs that we use and need to represent service points (product inventory, product configurator, cart, order etc)
------------------------------
Kind regards,
Matthieu Hattab
Digital Sales Domain Architect
Lyse Tele AS
Original Message:
Sent: Oct 08, 2025 05:33
From: Iwan Gramatikoff
Subject: TMF equivalent of our concept "ServicePoint"
Hi ,
If you want to define ServicePoint as a strongly-typed specialization, I would recommend against defining ServicePoint as a direct specialization of Place and would rather define ServicePoint as a specialization of GeographicSite because:
- Your servicePoint semantically corresponds to a GeographicSite:
From TMF674 "This API defines a Site as a convenience class that allows to easily refer to places important to other entities, where a geographic place is the entity that can answer the question "where?", allowing to determine where things are in relation to the earth's surface, and can be represented either in a textual structured way (geographic address) or as a geometry referred to a spatial reference system (geographic location) "
- You can directly leverage TMF674 API and TMFC014 ODA component
Then your sample would look like that:
place: [
{
id: "xxxx-yyyyyyyy-z",
"@baseType": "GeographicSite",
"@referredType": "ServicePoint",
},
],
Best regards, Iwan
------------------------------
Iwan Gramatikoff
Edelweiss Service Consulting SàRL
Original Message:
Sent: Oct 08, 2025 05:23
From: Torbjørn Søiland
Subject: TMF equivalent of our concept "ServicePoint"
Thank you both for your replies.
GeographicSite is definitely an option. I think however we would name the siteCategory "ServicePoint", since our ServicePoint is created long before fiber actually enters the building or any optical termination is installed. Do you see any problems with that?
Also we have had suggestions to use polymorphism and define a new place type called "ServicePoint". Is that something either of you have experience with?
place: [
{
id: "xxxx-yyyyyyyy-z",
"@referredType": "ServicePoint",
},
],
------------------------------
Torbjørn Søiland
Lyse Tele AS
Original Message:
Sent: Oct 08, 2025 03:52
From: Koen Peeters
Subject: TMF equivalent of our concept "ServicePoint"
Hi Torbjorn, Iwan,
Iwan is correct that your ServicePoint is best modelled as a GeographicSite. GeographicSites are places with a specific relevance for the CSP. It is where Resources can be placed.
I would like to share the siteCategories that I modelled for an FTTH network.
Your ServicePoint probably refer to the siteCategory BuildingEntryPoint and OpticalTerminationPoint. The naming convention is derived from a FTTH Council Guidebook.
I hope that helps.
Best Regards
------------------------------
Koen Peeters
Ciminko SA
Original Message:
Sent: Oct 07, 2025 03:33
From: Iwan Gramatikoff
Subject: TMF equivalent of our concept "ServicePoint"
Hi Torbjørn,
I have seen this concept being represented in multiple ways, so I do not assume to provide here the one and only answer, but what is my opinion and recommendation for a best fit with the TMF semantics.
What you call a ServicePoint is best modelled as a GeographicSite:
- A GeographicSite's Where is defined by GeographicAddress / SubAddress and or GeographicLocation
- A GeographicSite has siteCategory and siteFeature to qualify it further eg. service capabilities
Resources bound to a ServicePoint can then be linked to GeographicSite using Resource.place relationship
I hope that helps.
Best regards, Iwan
------------------------------
Iwan Gramatikoff
Edelweiss Service Consulting SàRL
Original Message:
Sent: Oct 06, 2025 07:30
From: Torbjørn Søiland
Subject: TMF equivalent of our concept "ServicePoint"
We have a concept called ServicePoint in our as-is-architecture and we're trying to find the most appropriate equivalent for our TMF aligned to-be-architecture.
A ServicePoint in our system is linked with a single geographic address, which in turn can have multiple ServicePoints.
ServicePoints pre-exists any service. They are created ahead of time for all households in areas where we build access/metro networks.
It is used in both feasibility check and service orders to answer the question "WHERE do you want the service delivered?"
Can anyone offer any guidance to how this concept is modelled in TMF?
Of course the where-question hints at using a sub type of Place, but which one (including the option to extend with a specific sub type for ServicePoint)?
There have also been suggestions to model it as a resource, but how then to use it in SQM and SOM to answer the where-question?
------------------------------
Torbjørn Søiland
Lyse Tele AS
------------------------------