Issue 11775: GQAM: Domain Model & Profile (02) (marte-ftf) Source: Fundacion Tecnalia Research and Innovation (Mr. Huascar Espinoza Ph.D., Huascar.Espinoza(at)tecnalia.com) Nature: Enhancement Severity: Minor Summary: [GQAM: Domain Model & Profile] The notions included in the GQAM Observer package (TimingObserver, LatencyObserver) may be used not only for analysis purposes . I’d suggest to move this concepts to a more general package. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: December 7, 2007: received issue February 17, 2010: closed issue Discussion: Discussion: This is identical to issue 11776. Also, as discussed in issue resolution 11846, these concepts are analysis-specific concepts. There is no need to put them in a more general package. Disposition: Duplicate End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 07 Dec 2007 09:03:09 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Dr. Huascar Espinoza Company: CEA LIST mailFrom: huascar.espinoza@cea.fr Notification: Yes Specification: UML Profile for MARTE Section: GQAM FormalNumber: ptc/07-08-04 Version: Beta 1 RevisionDate: 08/04/07 Page: 265 Nature: Enhancement Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) Description [GQAM: Domain Model & Profile] The notions included in the GQAM Observer package (TimingObserver, LatencyObserver) may be used not only for analysis purposes . I.d suggest to move this concepts to a more general package. Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:08:01 -0500 (EST) From: Murray Woodside Reply-To: cmw@sce.carleton.ca To: issues@omg.org Subject: issue 11775 -- MARTE FTF issue This is not an issue that can be resolved only within GQAM, it needs a proposal as to where it should be moved to. Given that partial compliance is supported, it should not be made to depend on the whole of another package. It seems to relate well to the TimedDurationObservation in the TimedObservations package in sec 9.2.4.3, p 65. Huascar designed the Observer package, so perhaps he could imagine where it should go, and if that section is a good fit, how it could fit there. Murray Woodside ---------- * Name: Dr. Huascar Espinoza * Company: CEA LIST * mailFrom: huascar.espinoza@cea.fr * Notification: Yes * Specification: UML Profile for MARTE * Section: GQAM * FormalNumber: ptc/07-08-04 * Version: Beta 1 * RevisionDate: 08/04/07 * Page: 265 * Nature: Enhancement * Severity: Minor * HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.1) Description [GQAM: Domain Model & Profile] The notions included in the GQAM Observer package (TimingObserver, LatencyObserver) may be used not only for analysis purposes . I'd suggest to move this concepts to a more general package. Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services Object Management Group 140 Kendrick St Building A Suite 300 Needham, MA 02494 USA tel: +1 781 444 0404 x 132 fax: +1 781 444 0320 email: juergen@omg.org www.omg.org Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:09:31 -0500 (EST) From: Murray Woodside Reply-To: cmw@sce.carleton.ca To: marte-ftf@omg.org Subject: issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II This proposal by Huascar involves other working groups. It seems to me that time is the obvious place, since the observer is event driven and observes time intervals. However it could also observe state at given events. So could the time wg please consider if observers defined in gqam should be better defined in their chapter? Murray Woodside Distinguished Research Professor Dept of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa K1S 5B6, Canada. (613)-520-5721.....fax (613)-520-5727....cmw@sce.carleton.ca (http://www.sce.carleton.ca/faculty/woodside.html) Subject: RE: issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:19:42 +0100 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II thread-index: Achv3P2NFlKEzFQaQmCu9j+jK9KSeACOrpWw From: "GERARD Sebastien 166342" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Feb 2008 10:19:42.0408 (UTC) FILETIME=[C6BBF480:01C87217] X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id m1IAMSvV025406 I second this proposal. Charles, what do you think on that? Séb -----Message d'origine----- De : Murray Woodside [mailto:cmw@sce.carleton.ca] Envoyé : vendredi 15 février 2008 15:10 À : marte-ftf@omg.org Objet : issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II This proposal by Huascar involves other working groups. It seems to me that time is the obvious place, since the observer is event driven and observes time intervals. However it could also observe state at given events. So could the time wg please consider if observers defined in gqam should be better defined in their chapter? Murray Woodside Distinguished Research Professor Dept of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa K1S 5B6, Canada. (613)-520-5721.....fax (613)-520-5727....cmw@sce.carleton.ca (http://www.sce.carleton.ca/faculty/woodside.html) Subject: RE: issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:32:53 -0000 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II Thread-Index: Achv3P2NFlKEzFQaQmCu9j+jK9KSeACOrpWwABE9Hhk= From: "VanZandt, Lonnie" To: "GERARD Sebastien 166342" , , The impact to SAM is slight because SAM already delegates the details to GQAM and moving the parent elements to Time does not alter the conceptual use of the Observers. "Time" does seem to be a natural place for these Observers... Lonnie VanZandt Field Applications Engineer Denver, CO Artisan Software Tools mobile: 720 201-1349 desk: 303 482-2943 lonnie.vanzandt@artisansw.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: GERARD Sebastien 166342 [mailto:Sebastien.GERARD@cea.fr] Sent: Mon 2/18/2008 3:19 AM To: cmw@sce.carleton.ca; marte-ftf@omg.org Subject: RE: issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II I second this proposal. Charles, what do you think on that? Séb -----Message d'origine----- De : Murray Woodside [mailto:cmw@sce.carleton.ca] Envoyé : vendredi 15 février 2008 15:10 À : marte-ftf@omg.org Objet : issue 11775 move observer package to part I or II This proposal by Huascar involves other working groups. It seems to me that time is the obvious place, since the observer is event driven and observes time intervals. However it could also observe state at given events. So could the time wg please consider if observers defined in gqam should be better defined in their chapter? Murray Woodside Distinguished Research Professor Dept of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa K1S 5B6, Canada. (613)-520-5721.....fax (613)-520-5727....cmw@sce.carleton.ca (http://www.sce.carleton.ca/faculty/woodside.html) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:39:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Murray Woodside Reply-To: cmw@sce.carleton.ca To: marte-ftf@omg.org Subject: issue 11775 discussion Source: Commissariat a l Energie Atomique-CEA/LIST (Mr. Huascar Espinoza, huascar.espinoza@cea.fr) Nature: Enhancement Severity: Minor Summary: [GQAM: Domain Model & Profile] The notions included in the GQAM Observer package (TimingObserver, LatencyObserver) may be used not only for analysis purposes . Id suggest to move this concepts to a more general package. ===== Discussion ===== (Woodside) I am against this because it would change the nature of the stereotype from an analysis concept defining a measure, into a functional concept. In the spirit of MARTE this functional concept would need to be precisely defined, perhaps with different approaches (such as (1) read a clock at begin and end, versus (2) set a timer and generate an interrupt at the end to read the timer). It is too big a change for the FTF, I think. Murray Woodside Distinguished Research Professor Dept of Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa K1S 5B6, Canada. (613)-520-5721.....fax (613)-520-5727....cmw@sce.carleton.ca