Wrong image provided by ServiceNow? How to read the relationships of CSDM tables?

[Suggy]

How to read the relationships of CSDM tables from the image?

(case i) Left CI class + ::rel type on right + right CI Class.

or

(case ii) left CI class + ::rel type on left + right CI Class.

If I consider the 1st case (rel type on right)

Business capability - PROVIDED BY - Business application >>>>>>>>>which is CORRECT

Application - RUNS ON - Infrastructure CIs >>>>>>>>>which is INCORRECT

If I consider the 2nd  case (rel type on left)

Business capability - PROVIDES - Business application >>>>>>>>>which is INCORRECT

Application - RUNS - Infrastructure CIs >>>>>>>>>which is INCORRECT

PS - I can go to CI class manager and see but I cannot do it for classes. To save time, I relied on the official image but

its **bleep** confusing!!!

Is that image wrong or what?

[Sohail Khilji]

HI @Suggy ,

Its about the understanding on verb how ServiceNow has used it. not every time it would fit the relationship in generic terms.

If you look at:

Application Runson :: runs Infra CIs

Here you must read it the below way:

1. Application do run on Infra CIs

2. Infra CIs enables to run Applications on it.

[Suggy]

@Sohail Khilji Relation between Application and Infra is an easy one. Even a first timer can guess the relation between them, but for the rest of the components the relationships are nothing easy to guess/remember in mind. One has to refer the docs/image but relying on that is giving wrong interpretation (the post that I have created here for the same reason)

[Suggy]

Anyone 🙂

[Jonathan Schnei]

What CI's are you trying to relate together that are not being populated automatically by discovery, the relationship is not explicitly prescribed by the CSDM, or the relationship is not suggested by ServiceNow?

ServiceNow has done most of the legwork for this, but there could be specific use cases that are missed. Luckily, the framework is designed in a way that you can adapt it as needed. We can help advise on specific use cases you may have, but if you are adapting or creating relationships between CI's that are not automated, prescribed, or suggested by SN, that is also OK. Of course, be sure you document internally and apply consistently. For any of the relationships that are not automated/prescribed/suggested, there are no OOB workflows so the only risk to using the relationships framework in your own logical way to help describe your environment is the technical debt you may incur if that custom use case does not align with CSDM.

[Suggy]

Hi @Jonathan Schnei  I am not talking about the relationships populated by Discovery. 

I am talking about the relationships where logical CI's/conceptual CI's are involved.