Scope of the Validation act
If one has a verification act (a specialization of OBS) associated with a Role, and the verification act states that the subject of that act ahs been verified, then what is the subject of the verification?
- Is it just the Role and its attributes? Does it include the player and scoper of that role? Does it extend to all parts of the model that can be reached as long as one walks associations in the right direction? Is this subject to context conduction?
(Lloyd) this ties into similar questions around identifiers, versions and references. When you reference, how much are you referencing? If we can come up with a good answer for one, we should be able to apply it to the other. Personal opinion is that this is a completely different axis than context conduction. Context conduction is about propagation of semantics, not about "bounding" referenced data.
(Jane Curry) I think that the verification needs to be the role class and it's attributes as well as the player and scoper entities attached, since they are part of the definition of the role. My usual rule of thumb is to start with the focal class and then take away something and ask if that changes the meaning of the focal class. If it does - put it back.
There may be business practices during verification that verifies different scopes. It could range from a verification of identity and validity of relationship of scoper to player at a minimum or it could also include all of the qualifications associated with the role. Sorta like a background check - when do you trust an organization in a chain to have done their own due diligence? So you have deep background checks and shallow background checks, with the deep ones re-checking all the statements made by the other organizations. Not too many health verification practices do that that I'm aware.