From f39c5e9b7619d2a7550e901721fdbcd23358c2c8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rob Craig Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 14:40:14 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Create 2024-08-02.md Adds meeting minutes/agenda SPDX FuSa Meeting 2024-08-02 --- safety/2024-08-02.md | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+) create mode 100644 safety/2024-08-02.md diff --git a/safety/2024-08-02.md b/safety/2024-08-02.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..47cc3764 --- /dev/null +++ b/safety/2024-08-02.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +# SPDX FuSa Meeting 2024-08-02 + +## Attendees +* Steven Carbno +* Nicole Pappler +* Chuck Wolber +* Alfred Strauch +* Ryan Brooks +* Kate Stewart +* Ayan Kumar Halder + +## Agenda +- Continue discussion of modeling + +## Notes +- Introduced notion of Action, that has been introduced +- Things on checklists makes sense as "Actions" class + - Actor vs Participant vs Agent (what we have defined). + - Roles for participants - "Role is based on type of actor" + - Actor type is not sufficient to differentiate role. + - Should Actor have a role property, or should we use a set of relationship types. + - We should differentiate context of entity vs their roles around actions? +- Is an Agent a system? OTE - Automated test Environment. + - How should a system be tied into this? + - X person started the automated test framework, then. +- For now - let's use element collection for a system. Can Element collection be used as an agent object? + -Do we need an "operates" type of relationship. Who operates the action. + - Do we need an object that shows what is a standard. + - Plan for Aspect of Cerification (PSAC) is document calling the shots... +- Should we consider Certification as a "Requirement"; + - Certification plans tree down to subsystems; and show evidence of compliance during the processes. Might be refered to as a compliance plan. + - Design is encompassed in requirements, so not sure certification should be considered this way. + - Pedigree to show actors are qualified for the job. +- Top level is compliance plan, which breaks down into subsystems... +- Compliance Object - need somethign to represent the standard as it's own entity. Which things comply with. + - Hazard Assessment, Mitigation, and Compliance. +- Standard would be an Artifact. + - then it would be a requirement the Safety Plan. + +- Should we add a type to requirements - to encompass standards? Let's try this. + - Hazard assessment, should provide level of rigour. Doing hazard assessment creates requirements on system as well. + - Consider adding type on requirement object + - Chuck will look to see if we can map PSAC to these concepts. + +- Discussion should requirements have actions associated with them, that can generate evidence, that becomes requirements. +- Should we have requirement types? chaining. Someone's evidence, is another part's relationship. +- Types: planning, execution, etc. ... +- Evidence says, we need more requirements. Evidence is "generating" Requirments. +- Abstraction of planning document.