nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Jama integration - upstream vs downstream relations

medini_1037599039

Hi Jan,

For requirements export from Medini to Jama, I am trying to export relation mapping between Safety goals and TSRs (contribution relation in medini). My mapping file has something like this:

<relationMappings

mediniRelation="Contribution"

mappedRelation="Related to"/>

I am able to export the relation "Contribution" to Jama, however, in Jama the TSRs are specified as "upstream item" for Safety goals. Safety goals are in fact a higher abstraction requirement and I would like to see connected TSRs as "downstream item".

So my question here is, do I need to to specify "upstream" / "downstream" explicitly in the mapping file somehow? Is there another way to accomplish this functionality? Let me know if you need any additional information.

Regards,

Gulroz Singh

Find more posts tagged with

medini

medini legacy

Accepted answers

All comments

medini_1024169437

Hi Gulroz,

so my understanding is that the "Related to" relationship is created but in the wrong direction, right?

You may use direction="opposite" in the relation mapping to revere it, similar to this example:

<relationMappings
 mediniRelation="Decomposition"
 mappedRelation="Child Of"
 direction="opposite"/>

Happy Scripting

Jan

medini_1037599039

Thanks, Jan! It works!

medini_1040753747

It looks like the "mappedType" can be found through the Admin > Organization > Item types view within Jama. Where can the "mappedAttribute" and "mappedRelation" keywords be found in Jama?

medini_1024169437

Hi Johan,

the admin page also has details on the item type and its attributes:

and there are information on relations as well:

Note two further things: there is a default mapping project on our landing page that matches the Jama Automotive solution, check that out maybe:

and second: in debug mode, there is an additional action to dump the types to the clipboard, its not as nice as the admin page but may help you out:

Regards

Jan

medini_1040753747

If I have requirements in separate requirements models, for example, safety goals and functional requirements. I map each requirement model to a separate set within Jama but there is a contribution relationship between the two. And the Jama set does not include both safety goal and functional req types (it is either one or the other). Is there a way to complete the relationMapping if they are exported separately?

medini_1024169437

Hi Johan, we name this "cross model relations" and that should work IMHO.

So assume you export medini model A to Jama set X and medini model B to Y, then the relation should be created when exporting B because at that time, everything is in place.

What happens in your scenario?

Jan

medini_1040753747

This was an error on my side... Safety Goals set was corrupted in Jama (probably from all my jama xml mapping experimenting). I deleted the set and re-exported. Pushed the related requirements again and the relations were created! I am very impressed with the cross model relations!! Great work guys :-)

medini_1040753747

I cannot seem to get trace relationships to work...

<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Trace"
		mappedRelation="Associated with"/>

What is the correct syntax?

Also, the direction="opposite" suggested earlier did not change my contribution relation from downstream to upstream. Just didn't create the relationship...

<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Contribution"
		mappedRelation="Related to"
		direction="opposite"/>

Am I doing it wrong?

medini_1040753747

UPDATE: if I create the relationship in Jama and pull the update into medini, it creates the trace in medini! Using the same jama xml mapping, if I create the trace in medini and push to Jama - no relationship is created...

medini_1040753747

Ok I think my problems are resolved haha... needed to set "Kind" to relationship type before pushing

medini_1024169437

Yes Johan, Traces are somewhat special so the mapping to the remote Relation is done on Trace Kind to support to map multiple Relations to Traces.

Should have thouhgt on that, glad you solved it!

Jan

medini_1063548292

Hi I have a additional question to this topic.

So I have a scenario where in JAMA there are multiple relationship types between the items and I wanted to create a mapping that will convert all of them and translates them into a medini's "Contribution".

And I seem to hit the wall here.

<!-- translate Related to , Derived from JAMA into Contribution -->
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Contribution"
		mappedRelation="Related to"
		direction="opposite"/>
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Contribution"
		mappedRelation="Derived from"
		direction="opposite"/>

Resulting state at mapping selection page ( import wizard) , the mapping file cannot be selected

Strangely enough If I do reimport of already imported Model with this modified mapping then it does not seems to be a problem at all, because the reimport proceeds through the synchronization without any error/warning raised and there are some updates reflected -> only the prescribed relationships are not taken into account -> silently ignored

My observations and trials

changing the direction -> still complaining about duplicate definition

The only working solution was to use Trace as mediniRelation because it is nadled differently ( mappedRelation => Trace Kind)

In the end it would require some extra script to swap traces for Contributions after the update is completed ...

<!-- translate Related to , Derived from JAMA into Trace-->
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Trace"
		mappedRelation="Related to"
		direction="opposite"/>
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Trace"
		mappedRelation="Derived from"
		direction="opposite"/>

Currently there is only onInit and no onPost where one could place some postprocessing ( only some custom hook came to my mind => cannon to kill a mosquito)

Also doing this during the synchronization seem to be too complex.

I considered to create duplicate typeMapping with mapped selector and another relationship mapping seem to be a bit complex aas it requires some info fetching and some synch aware scrip function to handle it ( inlcuding fetching data form the element > extra time finish synchronization operation.

<!-- translate Related to , Derived from JAMA into Trace-->
<typeMappings 
 mappedSelector = " some code to accept the elements with given relatioship "
...
 <relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Contribution"
		mappedRelation="Related to"
		direction="opposite"/>
</typeMappings>
<typeMappings>
 mappedSelector = " some code to accept the elements with given relatioship 
...
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Contribution"
		mappedRelation="Derived from"
		direction="opposite"/>
</typeMappings>

And to complete the picture the Duplication is detected also in for case when the mappedRelation has multiple mappings mapped is the same

<!-- translateDerived from JAMA into Trace, COnribution-->
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Contribution"
		mappedRelation="Derived from"
		direction="opposite"/>
<relationMappings
		mediniRelation="Trace"
		mappedRelation="Derived from"
		direction="opposite"/>

Marian

medini_1024169437

Yes marian, your observations are correct. We do not allow 1:n or n:1 mappings for relations as we would not know how to export resp import such a mapping.

What I mean is, what works in one direction doe snot work in the other direction, the n side. For Trace its different as the type of the name of the remote relation is encoded in the trace type.

If you have a good proposal how to avoid the 'n' dilemma... we may improve.

Jan