> 3) Your examples shows a parameter definition resource being used across multiple Automation Plans.
That's the nub of the discussion I think. Two APs, each with a single identically named parameter -- so is it really 1 parameter or 2? It's another version of the relationship between a property and a class that uses the property. Is the class (AP) providing a single namespace that scopes all its properties (so any apparently identical property names across different classes are still in fact unique), making the property's definition wholly contained within the class, or is wider property definition re-use possible and therefore the relationship is more nuanced/layered? I'd suggest that (for AP parameters at least) the scenario we must support is the one with no re-use. I make up my own parameter names, their definitions are wholly specific to the AP instance, period. "Definition" then includes things like required-ness. If/when we have concrete scenario(s) to re-use parameter definitions themselves, then we can talk about the more complex/layered relationships that may exist between a parameter definition that can exist independently of any AP and the AP(s) that re-use (perhaps, simultaneously refine in the context of a given AP). We might possibly say that we do not wish to *prevent* such re-use in the future, but I do not know of anything more that we must say today. Best Regards, John Voice US 845-435-9470 BluePages Tivoli OSLC Lead - Show me the Scenario
