scope:

UOM-ASR Volume II describes the detailed analysis of the informational and behavioral model within a Unified Ordering Model. In addition, it defines at a more detailed level of the business requirements and systems requirements needed to conduct ordering activities efficiently over an electronic interface. This includes a blending of the pre-ordering, service request and post-confirmation activities.

Specifically, UOM-ASR Volume II-Analysis describes access service ordering as defined in:

• UOM-ASR Volume I

• Access Service Ordering Guidelines (ASOG)

• Multiple Exchange Carriers Ordering and Design (MECOD)

• Design Layout Report (DLR) Guidelines for Access Service

These business requirements are developed and maintained within the Ordering and Billing Forum (OBF) under the auspices of the Ordering Solutions Committee/Access Service Ordering Subcommittee.

UOM-ASR Volume II Analysis contains both the Informational and Behavioral Models that provide the reader a broad understanding of Service Ordering. Specifically, each model provides a dimension to the overall process:

• Informational Model describes the data relationships.

• Behavioral Model describes the data as it acts with stimuli/events over time.

Both the Informational and Behavioral Models are described using the Unified Modeling Language (UML). The UML provides the notation used within UOM-ASR Volume II. Because of the level of complexities inherent in such an electronic ordering model, unified modeling language tools (MyEclipse^TM) have been used to develop this volume¹.

NOTE: A new UML tool has been chosen for updating class diagrams, starting with ASOG35. With the previous UML tool, 'one and only one' associations displayed a '1' on the association line connecting classes. With this new tool, the '1' is omitted. Any changed class diagrams (moving forward) will no longer display the '1'. The absence of a multiplicity indicator on these association lines should be interpreted as 'one and only one' multiplicity.

¹ The use of MyEclipse^TM does not reflect a tool recommendation by either the authors or the associated Industry Forums.