design specification

IRI: https://spec.industrialontologies.org/ontology/construct/DesignSpecification

Defined In: https://spec.industrialontologies.org/ontology/core/Core/

SubClass Of: information content entity

Class Hierarchy

owl:Thing › bfo:entity › bfo:continuant › bfo:generically dependent continuant › information content entity › design specification

Direct subclasses:

Definition

information content entity that prescribes something man-made

Explanatory Notes

  1. Design specification may be a model or a textual or graphical specification.

  2. This class is not intended to be used to represent the design of planned processes. For this purpose, plan specification should be used.

  3. Something ‘man-made’ comprehends those physical and non-physical things that are intentionally created by human beings. Hence the thing specified by a design specification may be either BFO:GDC or BFO:Material Entity.

  4. A design specification specifies what the thing should be, such as its shape, size, tolerance, and performance but not necessarily how the thing should be made. If it contains information on how a thing should be made, this should be modeled separately through a ‘plan specification’ that is ‘part of’ the design specification

  5. Typically, a design specification satisfies a set of requirements

Examples

  • document specifying the characteristics of a pharmaceutical product; the design of a software program to schedule the work orders in a factory

Counter-Examples

  • process design

Adapted From

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design and from http://www.ontologyrepository.com/CommonCoreOntologies/Mid/InformationEntityOntology, term under the name ‘artifact design’

Primitive Class

This class is declared primitive and it does not have necessary and sufficient condiftions defined.

Primitive Rationale

See the general discussion and rationale provided for informational entities under ‘information content entity’.

Formal Axioms

First-Order Logic Axioms 

LA1: DesignSpecification(x) → InformationContentEntity(x) ∧ ∀c (prescribes(x,c) → Continuant(c))

LA2: InformationContentEntity(x) ∧ ∃c∃r(Continuant(c) ∧ RequirementSpecification(r) ∧ satisfiesRequirement(x,r) ∧ prescribes(x,c)) ∧ ∀c1(prescribes(x,c1) → Continuant(c1)) → DesignSpecification(x)

Semi-Formal Natural Language Axioms

LA1: if d is a ‘design specification’ then d is an ‘information content entity’ and whenever d ‘prescribes’ y that y must be a ‘continuant’

LA2: if d is an ‘information content entity’ that ‘prescribes’ some ‘continuant’ and that ‘satisfies requirement’ some ‘requirement specification’ and if all y that d ‘presribes’ are instance of ‘continuant’ then d is a ‘design specification’

Description Logic

constr:DesignSpecification ⊑ constr:InformationContentEntity

constr:DesignSpecification ⊑ ∀ constr:prescribes .bfo:continuant

constr:InformationContentEntity ⊓ ∃ constr:prescribes .bfo:continuant ⊓ ∃ constr:satisfiesRequirement .constr:RequirementSpecification ⊓ ∀ constr:prescribes .bfo:continuant ⊑ constr:DesignSpecification

SubClassOf: constr:InformationContentEntity

SubClassOf: constr:prescribes only bfo:continuant

constr:InformationContentEntity and constr:prescribes some bfo:continuant and constr:satisfiesRequirement some constr:RequirementSpecification and constr:prescribes only bfo:continuant SubClassOf: constr:DesignSpecification