Issue 10047: SysML: Protocol State Machines needed (sysml-rtf) Source: Lockheed Martin (Mr. Michael Jesse Chonoles, michael_chonoles2(at)omg.org) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The current document eliminates Protocol State Machines on the grounds of simplification. See Section 13 However, this leaves a hole in the capabilities of SysML. Currently, SysML supports UML interfaces (provided and required), which can’t have state machines to define them. It is an important part of designing systems interfaces (SE terminology) to define the details of the (UML/SysML) Interfaces. These details include the allowed ordering of messages. As we are not allowed to use behavior state machines and the standard solution, that of, protocol state machines are not included, we can’t properly do interface engineering within SysML If some other solution/work-around is proposed (which I don’t recommend) the explanation of how to accomplish this should be in the spec. Resolution: Following is the discussion from a previous deferred resolution by the SysML 1.1 RTF: This issue was previously deferred by the FTF with the following discussion comment: Discussed on conference call during Anaheim Meeting (Sept 26, 2006). It was deemed that this would introduce new content into SysML 1.0 . It was felt that there is a need for experience in SysML prior to making such a change or extension. Deferred for future consideration. No additional resolution was reached by the current RTF. This issue is being deferred because no proposed resolution was voted on during the schedule of the SysML 1.3 RTF. Disposition: Deferred Revised Text: Actions taken: July 31, 2006: received issue Discussion: Discussion: Discussed on conference call during Anaheim Meeting (Sept 26, 2006). It was deemed that this would introduce new content into SysML 1.0 . It was felt that there is a need for experience in SysML prior to making such a change or extension. Deferred for future consideration. Disposition: Deferred End of Annotations:===== te: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:53:10 -0400 From: "Chonoles, Michael J" Subject: SysML: Protocol State Machines needed To: issues@omg.org Thread-Topic: SysML: Protocol State Machines needed Thread-Index: Aca0yix9Mu2xV8zFQ4SNaLNe/oMaqA== X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Jul 2006 17:53:10.0789 (UTC) FILETIME=[2FF92B50:01C6B4CA] The current document eliminates Protocol State Machines on the grounds of simplification. See Section 13 However, this leaves a hole in the capabilities of SysML. Currently, SysML supports UML interfaces (provided and required), which can.t have state machines to define them. It is an important part of designing systems interfaces (SE terminology) to define the details of the (UML/SysML) Interfaces. These details include the allowed ordering of messages. As we are not allowed to use behavior state machines and the standard solution, that of, protocol state machines are not included, we can.t properly do interface engineering within SysML If some other solution/work-around is proposed (which I don.t recommend) the explanation of how to accomplish this should be in the spec. Michael Jesse Chonoles Principal Member of Engineer Staff Enterprise Architecture Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors (MS2) 199 Borton Landing Rd, MS 780-2A, Moorestown, NJ, 08057 Lockheed Martin IS&S King of Prussia, PA michael.j.chonoles@lmco.com Co-author UML 2 For Dummies OMG-Certified UML Advanced Professional (856) 359-1383 NJ -- Voice/Voice Mail (610) 644-8404 PA -- Voice/Voice Mail (215) 790-2976 E-Fax (609) 760-2180 Mobile mjchonoles Skype smime2.p7s