Zie ook: Modeling exercises with Metapattern

 

Now, how does Core Person fit?

in: Semic’s Core Person Contextualized

 

[S]ketching — a foundation for — a general banking model[,] I’ve started from what I find will become, say, a citizen’s right in the information age regarding her/his financial resources management, too. So, a particular (sub)set of financial resources — for easier reference, just think of a bank account — is no longer irreducibly tied up with a particular banking institution. I assume it to be transferable, instead. Then, it’s not just that the one or more ‘owners’ of the account can change its ‘account manager,’ that is, move the account from one bank to another. It should also be possible for such an account to change owner(s). Over time, contexts may change.

in: On metapattern and other themes in information management

 

The patterns were originally designed to overcome basic problems with the traditional method of fund accounting applied by Dutch ministries and other institutions of central government.

in: Metapattern for financial accounting
nb voorbeeld volgens oorspronkelijke notatie van Metapatroon

 

Of particular interest are (1) problems which help illuminate how Metapattern differs from traditional object orientation and, (2) how it enables a modeler to accomplish better solutions.

in: Metapattern as context orientation: meeting Odell's challenge of object orientation

 

The steps taken suggest that design is largely a bottom-up process. An experienced modeler, however, iterates between bottom-up and top-down differentiation.

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

 

The power of Metapattern as a method for disambiguating meaning through so-called contextual differentiation is demonstrated through modeling the first sentence in the Constitution of the Netherlands.

in: Publieks- en stelseltaal in wetgeving: Wat is het geval?

 

From the Metapattern perspective, what is critically important is what you mention [about Templix] as “circumstance.” I’d call it situation, or context. (There’s more about the difference between situation and context, but for now you may take those terms as synonyms.)

in: note 47.28

 

Examples can only make actual sense as a report of one particular subject addressing another particular subject, i.e. as a request for compliance. That way, the largest part of sign is recognized as context, needed for precision. There’s no contextless sign, as there is no situationless object to behave.

in: Analytic philosophy for synthesis from early education on

 

Anyway, I myself am from a social equity point of view interested in trying to model the varieties of health insurance as an integral part of a social whole. It explains why initially I don’t — seem to — address insurance issues at all; instead I am sort of experimenting with making, say, necessary and sufficient preconditions explicit for including it in an integrated order.

in: note 71.25

 

I have suggested actor as a crucial concept to focus much variety of social interaction on.
[A]s I am setting up actor for recursion, I have reconsidered what to take as the beginning of series. Please understand that it is not a matter of being absolutely right or wrong. Conceptual modeling is to a large extent about varying assumptions, and seeing how far they will carry without contradictions surfacing.
The reason I am bordering on the pathological with my focus on actor — or whatever you want to call it, actor, that is :-) — is that conceptual variety, touching upon and penetrating an ever larger set of social interactions, is otherwise simply impossible to control, including to adapt to, et cetera. The answer/solution is to assume wider-ranging variables, to be fitted with values as appropriate.
I did already draw your attention to the recursive nature of the actor concept. It is how rules for social interaction can be understood to differentially — allow us to — function. To qualify as a participant of some type in an event of some type, often another qualification must be fulfilled. For example, someone is only admitted to a hospital for treatment on the condition of being the holder of a valid health insurance policy; someone is only allowed to treat patients when being certified as a health care professional. There is no telling beforehand where such conditional recursion stops.
Instances for both functional differentiation and actor association supply necessary and sufficient values for yet another cycle of recursion. I repeat that I am primarily making conceptual assumptions.

in: note 71.36

 

When you are used to considering so-called applications separately, a provision for conditional recursion without limit may seem odd. But it really (!) is how behaviors of members of society are regulated. They are supposed to act in a variety of capacities according to circumstances. So, the more the scope of an integrated information order approaches all of society, the less escaping there is from explicitly facilitating such, say, actorial variety. In fact, the threshold for such radical abstraction being profitable, if not practically unavoidable, is soon crossed. Since the persons about whom information is registered can also be users in the current era of the Internet, authorization must cover the very scope of the integration information order. And users, in fact, are … actors.

in: note 71.36

 

The idea with actor as an articulated concept is to arrive at a single point of departure for recognizing participation in whatever (!) may be considered as an event. For we can now just assume an appropriate instance of actor being, say, prepared and take ‘the rest’ from there. […] From the perspective of participant as the pivotal concept, I propose to shift attention from modeling complexity underlying actor to complexity underlying event. At least for now, the actor concept seems adequately articulated. What about event? Similar advantages should be attainable from conceiving of a singular point of departure ‘on the other side’ of participant, too.

in: note 71.41