[sc34wg3] a new name for the Reference Model

[Martin Bryan]

Sam

> Using Patrick's metaphor: I have a "model" of a VW -- a kit of plastic
> parts to assemble according to a set of printed of directions. Then again
> there is a "meta-model" which could be the molds used to make the parts
> and the directions considered as content. Then again there is a
> "meta-meta-model" which is the ... principles used to design the molds and
> write the directions....
>
> But assembling a kit is not at all the same as making a mold is not at all
> the same as crafting a set of principles. And the "intent" to form (say) a
> plastic part is already built in to the word "mold", as the "intent" to
> assemble (say) a kit from plastic parts is already built in to the word
> "directions" as the "intent" to achieve a certain objective is built in
> to the word "principles."

The Airfix/Revel metamodel would require a) that each kit has an assembly
plan b) that each bit has a minimum size c) that all parts has the same
scale and d) that no single piece was smaller than XxY. In other words, it
would be a set of constraints on what you are calling the metamodel. A
metamodel, to me, is a statement of those constraints and structures that
should be shared by a group of related models. Hence my proposal of
metamodel for TMM.

Martin