Issue 10865: Identifiers (odm-rtf)
Source: NIST (Dr. Conrad Bock, conrad.bock(at)nist.gov)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Critical
Summary: Identifiers. In 16.2.2 (Class and Property - Basics), in the paragraph below Table 16.7, the first sentence says the translation assumes that a single name dentifies each instance of the class. It isn't necessary to assume this, since UML does not assume a relational semantics. The notion of identity is primitive in UML and applies even to instances of classes that have no attributes or attribute values. The rest of the paragraph may apply to relational implementations, but is not a general solution. It also assumes that the property names of classes are always different, but distinct classes can have the same properties in UML. (BTW, fourth sentence, "values" -> "names") 

Resolution: Replace text as described below.
Revised Text: Replace the third and fourth paragraph after Table 16.7 which currently reads:
That is there are cases in which a relational database implementation would use a compound key to identify an instance of a class. Since OWL individuals are always unitary names, the translation of the UML class would construct a unitary name from the values of the individual properties.
with
That is, there are cases in which a relational database implementation would use a compound key to identify an instance of a class. The translation of the UML class, when using compound keys, would construct a unitary name for an OWL individual from the value of the individual property.

Actions taken:
March 30, 2007: received issue
April 25, 2014: closed issue
Discussion: 
FTF resources were scarce and priority was given to issues against normative sections, hence many issues such as this were left unresolved.

Disposition:	Deferred to RTF

End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 30 Mar 2007 00:56:34 -0500
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name: Conrad Bock
Company: NIST
mailFrom: conrad.bock@nist.giv
Notification: No
Specification: Ontology Definition Metamodel
Section: Chapter 16
FormalNumber: ptc/06-10-11
Version: 
RevisionDate: 
Page: 
Nature: Revision
Severity: Critical
HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
Description
Identifiers. In 16.2.2 (Class and Property - Basics), in the paragraph below Table 16.7, the first sentence says the translation assumes that a single name dentifies each instance of the class. It isn't necessary to assume this, since UML does not assume a relational semantics. The notion of identity is primitive in UML and applies even to instances of classes that have no attributes or attribute values. The rest of the paragraph may apply to relational implementations, but is not a general solution. It also assumes that the property names of classes are always different, but distinct classes can have the same properties in UML. (BTW, fourth sentence, "values" -> "names")