160
Engineering Systems Integration
dealt in “hands” to players representing unique sets of cards that result in
functions that drive user (player) behaviors. The functions result from certain sequences or other relations between cards in the “hands” that are discernable by the players. That which could be combined and that which is
combined are not the same if integration is as commonly stated and defined.
The parts of the unique sets of cards in a “hand” do not represent the whole
of the game-play for all rules and conditions of the game. Integration must be
more than the mere combining of things to make a whole.
At the most basic level, we first realize that an object can be put together
with another object to make something that is comprised of these two objects,
neither of which combines with the other in any fashion except as a juxtaposition in space and as events in time.
The abstraction class is comprised of emotions, feelings, and conceptualizations; the social class is comprised of behaviors, money, power, and influence; and the model class is the logical description of a representation of a
proposed structure to achieve the best overall effect. The perspectives of the
class measurement framework are shown within the domains—objects and
processes. For objects, some of the possible key measurable properties are
dimensionality, mass, orientation, environment, temperature, pressure,
force(s), and motion. For functions, some of the possible key measurable
properties are stakeholder need(s), inputs (i.e., the release, (e.g., energy, matter
(the condition of having mass), information, or capital wealth (e.g., money)),
mechanism to transform input into output, condition (or state of the element), regulation (stability of the element), output (performance), and loss (to
achieve output performance)). For processes, some of the possible key measurable properties are potential uses (of physical and function items) managed and unmanaged factors, acts and activities, output (results), constraints
(time, money, skills, rules, policies), and loss (to achieve results).
Abstraction Classification of Integration
To begin to describe integration we discern the primary classifications of
integration—classifications that are completely descriptive of the various
aspects of an integrated system. That is not to say that these classifications
are only descriptive of integrated systems, rather to say that integrated systems
will be represented by the classifications, as well might other kinds of aggregations or combinations of objects and processes. In the early stages of conceptualizing a system, we observe the various types of thinking (which we
refer to as commonly defined cognition), the various social mechanisms
enacted by people (which we refer to as procedures), and the representations
of objects and processes (which we refer to as models or “representations”).
The three classifications of integration do not overlap. Therefore, the actions
of abstractions span ideas independently of the social or model classifications. We can think of these classifications in terms of business models that
delve into the relations between the socioeconomic values in businesses
Engineering Systems Integration
dealt in “hands” to players representing unique sets of cards that result in
functions that drive user (player) behaviors. The functions result from certain sequences or other relations between cards in the “hands” that are discernable by the players. That which could be combined and that which is
combined are not the same if integration is as commonly stated and defined.
The parts of the unique sets of cards in a “hand” do not represent the whole
of the game-play for all rules and conditions of the game. Integration must be
more than the mere combining of things to make a whole.
At the most basic level, we first realize that an object can be put together
with another object to make something that is comprised of these two objects,
neither of which combines with the other in any fashion except as a juxtaposition in space and as events in time.
The abstraction class is comprised of emotions, feelings, and conceptualizations; the social class is comprised of behaviors, money, power, and influence; and the model class is the logical description of a representation of a
proposed structure to achieve the best overall effect. The perspectives of the
class measurement framework are shown within the domains—objects and
processes. For objects, some of the possible key measurable properties are
dimensionality, mass, orientation, environment, temperature, pressure,
force(s), and motion. For functions, some of the possible key measurable
properties are stakeholder need(s), inputs (i.e., the release, (e.g., energy, matter
(the condition of having mass), information, or capital wealth (e.g., money)),
mechanism to transform input into output, condition (or state of the element), regulation (stability of the element), output (performance), and loss (to
achieve output performance)). For processes, some of the possible key measurable properties are potential uses (of physical and function items) managed and unmanaged factors, acts and activities, output (results), constraints
(time, money, skills, rules, policies), and loss (to achieve results).
Abstraction Classification of Integration
To begin to describe integration we discern the primary classifications of
integration—classifications that are completely descriptive of the various
aspects of an integrated system. That is not to say that these classifications
are only descriptive of integrated systems, rather to say that integrated systems
will be represented by the classifications, as well might other kinds of aggregations or combinations of objects and processes. In the early stages of conceptualizing a system, we observe the various types of thinking (which we
refer to as commonly defined cognition), the various social mechanisms
enacted by people (which we refer to as procedures), and the representations
of objects and processes (which we refer to as models or “representations”).
The three classifications of integration do not overlap. Therefore, the actions
of abstractions span ideas independently of the social or model classifications. We can think of these classifications in terms of business models that
delve into the relations between the socioeconomic values in businesses