Issue 12581: OCL 2.0 8.2 Collection Type name distinguishability (ocl2-rtf) Source: Model Driven Solutions (Dr. Edward Willink, ed(at)willink.me.uk) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The name of a Set (or other Collection) is defined to use the element type name. This is not consistent with the UML requirement for distinguishability of namespace memebers. (UML Infra 9.14.2 Namespace). OCL should permit, and perhaps require, that the name of a Collection use the element type qualified name, so that two sets of distinct element type are not folded into indistinguishable names. This is a problem for model to model transformation where the same class name can easily occur on both input and output meta-model, and where the requirement to reify collection types can easily result in Set(input::name) and Set(output::name) in the same namespace. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: July 19, 2008: received issue Discussion: Good remark. Now for the resolution we have the option to explicitly consider that the distinguishability rule does not apply for collections or follow the reporter suggestion, which could have some impact in pre-existing written OCL. I suggest to defer so that we take more time to examine the options. Disposition: Deferred End of Annotations:===== m: "Ed Willink" To: Subject: OCL 2.0 8.2 Collection Type name distinguishability Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:29:21 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 Thread-Index: AcjpcSkdut/1+gMuTtmqdUhD2RB5Dw== X-Plusnet-Relay: 9c17da6354bbf40f69dd63a3ae189a8a The name of a Set (or other Collection) is defined to use the element type name. This is not consistent with the UML requirement for distinguishability of namespace memebers. (UML Infra 9.14.2 Namespace). OCL should permit, and perhaps require, that the name of a Collection use the element type qualified name, so that two sets of distinct element type are not folded into indistinguishable names. This is a problem for model to model transformation where the same class name can easily occur on both input and output meta-model, and where the requirement to reify collection types can easily result in Set(input::name) and Set(output::name) in From: "Christian W. Damus" To: Juergen Boldt Subject: Re: issue 12581 -- OCL 2 RTF issue Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 09:44:25 -0400 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - s014.panelboxmanager.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - omg.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - zeligsoft.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: I am concerned about the proposal to embed the namespace separator within an element's name: parsing qualified names will generally see "Set(input::name)" as nested elements "Set(input" and "name)". Perhaps an alternative separator would do; perhaps a double underscore. Thus, "Set(input__name)" Thoughts? Christian On 29-Jul-08, at 1:54 PM, Juergen Boldt wrote: From: "Ed Willink" To: Subject: OCL 2.0 8.2 Collection Type name distinguishability Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:29:21 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 Thread-Index: AcjpcSkdut/1+gMuTtmqdUhD2RB5Dw== X-Plusnet-Relay: 9c17da6354bbf40f69dd63a3ae189a8a The name of a Set (or other Collection) is defined to use the element type name. This is not consistent with the UML requirement for distinguishability of namespace memebers. (UML Infra 9.14.2 Namespace). OCL should permit, and perhaps require, that the name of a Collection use the element type qualified name, so that two sets of distinct element type are not folded into indistinguishable names. This is a problem for model to model transformation where the same class name can easily occur on both input and output meta-model, and where the requirement to reify collection types can easily result in Set(input::name) and Set(output::name) in the same namespace. 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 -- Christian W. Damus Senior Software Developer, Zeligsoft Inc. Component Lead, Eclipse MDT OCL and EMF-QTV E-mail: cdamus@zeligsoft.com From: "Christian W. Damus" To: ocl2-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: issue 12581 -- OCL 2 RTF issue Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 09:47:48 -0400 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - s014.panelboxmanager.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - omg.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - zeligsoft.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sorry, my first attempt to reply was sent to Juergen only. I am concerned about the proposal to embed the namespace separator within an element's name: parsing qualified names will generally see "Set(input::name)" as nested elements "Set(input" and "name)". Perhaps an alternative separator would do; perhaps a double underscore. Thus, "Set(input__name)" Thoughts? Christian On 29-Jul-08, at 1:54 PM, Juergen Boldt wrote: From: "Ed Willink" To: Subject: OCL 2.0 8.2 Collection Type name distinguishability Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:29:21 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 Thread-Index: AcjpcSkdut/1+gMuTtmqdUhD2RB5Dw== X-Plusnet-Relay: 9c17da6354bbf40f69dd63a3ae189a8a The name of a Set (or other Collection) is defined to use the element type name. This is not consistent with the UML requirement for distinguishability of namespace memebers. (UML Infra 9.14.2 Namespace). OCL should permit, and perhaps require, that the name of a Collection use the element type qualified name, so that two sets of distinct element type are not folded into indistinguishable names. This is a problem for model to model transformation where the same class name can easily occur on both input and output meta-model, and where the requirement to reify collection types can easily result in Set(input::name) and Set(output::name) in the same namespace. 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 -- Christian W. Damus Senior Software Developer, Zeligsoft Inc. Component Lead, Eclipse MDT OCL and EMF-QTV E-mail: cdamus@zeligsoft.com the same namespace.