For every concept, basic questions according to Metapattern read:
— Regarding relevant scope, does the concept require disambiguation?
— If so, what (other) concepts supply its context?

in: Resident, designing a contextual-semantic diagram with metapattern

 

The whole point of conceptual modeling: unambiguous behaviors.

in: Metapattern Primer
opmerking: schets volgens oorspronkelijke notatie

 

In comparison, my goal for Metapattern is quite modest. I just want to make available a modelling method for requisite variety (of interdependence).

in: note 56.19

 

For practical orientation, start by imagining a boundary for what you want to include in — having an initial go at — an integrated order. Metapattern establishes such a boundary as a model’s horizon.

in: note 71.14

 

Imagine that the instances of something are each uniquely identified, say with some number. Nothing else is assumed to be known about them as somethings! Of course, that is not much to go on. That is where classification comes in. I am assuming a straightforward structure for a classification scheme, that is, a terminological hierarchy (as a case of a homogeneous hierarchy). It will amply serve the purpose. Even one level might often suffice.

in: note 71.36