Issue 12260: Section: 7.13.3 / 8.4.2 (qvt-rtf) Source: (, ) Nature: Enhancement Severity: Minor Summary: The specification introduces comments by concrete syntax. Comments within the abstract syntax are not considered. This is i.e. undesirable for automated analysis of software product quality to which transformations are subject. One would again need to analyze the AST instead of the transformation metamodel. So I propose to introduce comments for transformations. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: March 4, 2008: received issue July 15, 2014: closed issue Discussion: All Abstract Syntax elements extend EMOF::Element and so the Element::ownedComment property is available for comments. Disposition: Closed, No Change End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 04 Mar 2008 06:57:58 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Jens Kübler Company: Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe mailFrom: cleanerx@online.de Notification: Yes Specification: QVT Section: 7.13.3 / 8.4.2 FormalNumber: formal Version: 2.0 RevisionDate: 07/07/07 Page: 37, 115 Nature: Enhancement Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.8.1.10) Gecko/20071115 Iceweasel/2.0.0.10 (Debian-2.0.0.10-0etch1) Description The specification introduces comments by concrete syntax. Comments within the abstract syntax are not considered. This is i.e. undesirable for automated analysis of software product quality to which transformations are subject. One would again need to analyze the AST instead of the transformation metamodel. So I propose to introduce comments for transformations. From: "Willink, Ed" To: qvt-rtf@omg.org Subject: RE: issue 12260 -- MOF QVT RTF issue Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:45:16 -0000 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) EMOF already provides a Comment class. Why should QVT introduce something more/different? [There is an issue with respect to Ecore support for Comment, but that is nothing to do with QVT.] Perhaps QVT might define an extended grammar so that comments were uniformly parsed with respect to AST elements; but Java doesn't. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: 04 March 2008 19:51 To: issues@omg.org; qvt-rtf@omg.org Subject: issue 12260 -- MOF QVT RTF issue From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 04 Mar 2008 06:57:58 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Jens Kübler Company: Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe mailFrom: cleanerx@online.de Notification: Yes Specification: QVT Section: 7.13.3 / 8.4.2 FormalNumber: formal Version: 2.0 RevisionDate: 07/07/07 Page: 37, 115 Nature: Enhancement Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.8.1.10) Gecko/20071115 Iceweasel/2.0.0.10 (Debian-2.0.0.10-0etch1) Description The specification introduces comments by concrete syntax. Comments within the abstract syntax are not considered. This is i.e. undesirable for automated analysis of software product quality to which transformations are subject. One would again need to analyze the AST instead of the transformation metamodel. So I propose to introduce comments for transformations. 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 ******************************************************************************* Please consider the environment before printing this email. ******************************************************************************* This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and may not be divulged to any third party without the express permission of the originator. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Thales Research & Technology (UK) Limited. *******************************************************************************