Need an entity to map with "Group of CI" concept in ITOP

[sk-cool]

A CI (Configuration Item) in ITOP is currently mapped with respective MARS Node in GraphIT.

However ITOP allows to create CI groups with following set of attributes -

Name
Status
Parent Group (edge with other Group).
Organization (edge)
Associated CI (edges with MARS Nodes)
Description
Type

We need an GraphIT entity for this.

Thanks and Regards,
-Satish

[conofre]

Please clarify what kind of edge with organization is needed/what's its purpose

[sk-cool]

isRelatedTo.

If there is a specific edge type that gets inherited then please let us know.

Thanks,
-Satish

[conofre]

#169 could be used for the grouping, as the entity allows free attributes you could just create all the needed attributes as free.
In this context, please analyse the needed edges and get back to me with a list of what you think could be added to help you to model this.

[conofre]

Satish,
Please provide input if anything additional could be needed
Note that #169 is already implemented

[conofre]

Hi Satish, we reverted the creation of the too general entity for grouping because it doesn't make sense in a semantical ontology.
It seems that you are trying to model one to one the relational DB model of CI's into OGIT ontology, which does not have such a direct translation.
I suggest storing additional information as free attribute on the corresponding MARS nodes. There is already a direct way of coming to Organization from a MARSNode.

[sk-cool]

Hi Catarina,

The Group Of CI concept is similar to Service Families.

A new Group / Family can be explicitly created / deleted from iTOP UI.

MarsNodes do not allow free attributes.

Please suggest how to store these two separate groups (Service Family and Group of CI) along with support to CRUD operation on them.

Thanks and Regards,

-Satish

From: conofre [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 3:51 PM
To: arago/OGIT
Cc: Satish Khodke
Subject: Re: [OGIT] Need an entity to map with "Group of CI" concept in ITOP (#163)

Hi Satish, we reverted the creation of the too general entity for grouping because it doesn't make sense in a semantical ontology.
It seems that you are trying to model one to one the relational DB model of CI's into OGIT ontology, which does not have such a direct translation.
I suggest storing additional information as free attribute on the corresponding MARS nodes. There is already a direct way of coming to Organization from a MARSNode.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #163 (comment) . https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AFZE9g0th216J7dGpu-4S3Ceq2oVgrPTks5oGeJzgaJpZM4EFHzI.gif

[conofre]

Hi Satish,
For for CRUD support there is a separate issue on github, all feedback on it should be there.

The modeling of the existing relational DB of iTOP will not have a direct translation for most of the cases.

MARSNode's are now allowed to have free attributes in the ontology. An alternative way of having it would be using the extensions within the xml representation of the MARSNode (this xml is within the attribute arago/marsNodeFormalRepresentation ).

In terms of representing a service family, could you please specify this need in a more detailed way so that we understand the best way of representing it semantically speaking?

[sk-cool]

Can we have a belongs to relationship between ITService and ITService
catalog ? That might help solve this issue.
On May 6, 2015 6:28 PM, "conofre" [email protected] wrote:

Hi Satish,
For for CRUD support there is a separate issue on github, all feedback on
it should be there.

The modeling of the existing relational DB of iTOP will not have a direct
translation for most of the cases.

MARSNode's are now allowed to have free attributes in the ontology. An
alternative way of having it would be using the extensions within the xml
representation of the node.

In terms of representing a service family, could you please specify this
need in a more detailed way so that we understand the best way of
representing it semantically speaking?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#163 (comment).

[sk-cool]

Hi Catarina,

I could only find the following documentation around service family in ITOP.

https://wiki.openitop.org/doku.php?id=datamodel:itop-service-mgmt#service_family

Thanks,
-Satish

[conofre]

Hi Satish,
A service family name could be defined as free attribute in the ogit/ITService/Service if you need to store it.
No additional entities are actually needed from what I see on the itop documentation page (where unfortunately the service families are not clearly defined).

[sk-cool]

That would have helped if this was just an attribute for a Service.

If not separate entity, I was thinking about using the Service Catalog entity for this purpose.

There is a separate UI in ITOP, just to create/update/delete a service family, before you create any service. Where should I store it? It is supposed to be a separate entity because many services can be added to a service family.

Please take a look at the ITOP Images below. I am not sure if the images get attached to github issue so copying on email as well.

From: conofre [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 4:14 PM
To: arago/OGIT
Cc: Satish Khodke
Subject: Re: [OGIT] Need an entity to map with "Group of CI" concept in ITOP (#163)

Hi Satish,
A service family name could be defined as free attribute in the ogit/ITService/Service if you need to store it.
No additional entities are actually needed from what I see on the itop documentation page (where unfortunately the service families are not clearly defined).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #163 (comment) . https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AFZE9tQNeyZ4Ay3W_kceBfYJIFiq0KLPks5oGzmNgaJpZM4EFHzI.gif