Issue 13425: Section: 7.3.9 Comment should be NamedElement (uml2-rtf) Source: oose Innovative Informatik eG (Mr. Tim Weilkiens, tim.weilkiens(at)oose.de) Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant Summary: I propose to define the Comment as a NamedElement instead of Element. The SysML and UPDM working groups identified that it is necessary that comment based model elements have a name, could be packaged and identified. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: February 3, 2009: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 03 Feb 2009 05:12:14 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Tim Weilkiens Company: oose Innovative Informatik GmbH mailFrom: tim.weilkiens@oose.de Notification: Yes Specification: UML Superstructure Section: 7.3.9 Comment should be NamedElement FormalNumber: ptc/2008-05-05 Version: 2.2 RevisionDate: 05/05/2008 Page: 57 ff. Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; GTB5; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Description I propose to define the Comment as a NamedElement instead of Element. The SysML and UPDM working groups identified that it is necessary that comment based model elements have a name, could be packaged and identified. To: uml2-rtf@omg.org Subject: Fw: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue X-KeepSent: 8CEFD5BE:1C9E8A61-85257552:005C854E; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.5 December 05, 2008 From: Jim Amsden Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:53:26 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM118/03/M/IBM(Release 8.5|December 05, 2008) at 02/03/2009 09:53:26, Serialize complete at 02/03/2009 09:53:26 This feels like an abuse of Comment. Is there some subclass of NamedElement that could be stereotyped to meet the needs without introducing semantics to comments they way Java did with annotations? ----- Forwarded by Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM on 02/03/2009 11:50 AM ----- From: Juergen Boldt To: issues@omg.org, uml2-rtf@omg.org Date: 02/03/2009 11:42 AM Subject: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 03 Feb 2009 05:12:14 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Tim Weilkiens Company: oose Innovative Informatik GmbH mailFrom: tim.weilkiens@oose.de Notification: Yes Specification: UML Superstructure Section: 7.3.9 Comment should be NamedElement FormalNumber: ptc/2008-05-05 Version: 2.2 RevisionDate: 05/05/2008 Page: 57 ff. Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; GTB5; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Description I propose to define the Comment as a NamedElement instead of Element. The SysML and UPDM working groups identified that it is necessary that comment based model elements have a name, could be packaged and identified. 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 Subject: RE: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:25:34 +0100 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue thread-index: AcmGIGU4VnrtCB2DRnCMg/+eF418KQADDbRw From: "Tim Weilkiens" To: "Jim Amsden" , Class is under discussion to use it as a comment instead of the comment element itself. Could you clarify your concerns about comment as a NamedElement a little bit more? Thanks, Tim -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Amsden [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 5:53 PM To: uml2-rtf@omg.org Subject: Fw: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue This feels like an abuse of Comment. Is there some subclass of NamedElement that could be stereotyped to meet the needs without introducing semantics to comments they way Java did with annotations? ----- Forwarded by Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM on 02/03/2009 11:50 AM ----- From: Juergen Boldt To: issues@omg.org, uml2-rtf@omg.org Date: 02/03/2009 11:42 AM Subject: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 03 Feb 2009 05:12:14 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Tim Weilkiens Company: oose Innovative Informatik GmbH mailFrom: tim.weilkiens@oose.de Notification: Yes Specification: UML Superstructure Section: 7.3.9 Comment should be NamedElement FormalNumber: ptc/2008-05-05 Version: 2.2 RevisionDate: 05/05/2008 Page: 57 ff. Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; GTB5; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Description I propose to define the Comment as a NamedElement instead of Element. The SysML and UPDM working groups identified that it is necessary that comment based model elements have a name, could be packaged and identified. 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 Subject: FW: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:47:49 +0100 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue thread-index: AcmGLkDJaH8CfP1/TCGaKW9VDvyvwQAAJ2IQAAA+KFA= From: "Tim Weilkiens" To: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Weilkiens Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 7:47 PM To: 'Jim Amsden' Subject: RE: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue In SysML we use for example a stereotyped comment to document problems in the model (Stereotype Problem). Of course that leads to a demand to have Problem lists and maybe to have some kind of lifecycle of the problems. Same for Rationale and Concern which are other usages of Comment in SysML or UPDM. I see no problem that comments have a identity. They still do not add any semantics to the annotated elements. They just represent information for the readers of the model. I'm pretty sure that we need something like that. I prefer the comment. If we decide against the comment, we need an alternative approach. Tim -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Amsden [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 7:36 PM To: Tim Weilkiens Subject: RE: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue Comments should be comments, and not add semantic meaning as a back-door extension mechanism with no known semantics. So I don't think it makes sense to name comments or package them in any particular way. Comments don't provides semantics so they don't need identity - it is the things they are attached to that have semantics and identity. From: "Tim Weilkiens" To: Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Date: 02/03/2009 01:25 PM Subject: RE: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Class is under discussion to use it as a comment instead of the comment element itself. Could you clarify your concerns about comment as a NamedElement a little bit more? Thanks, Tim -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jim Amsden [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 5:53 PM To: uml2-rtf@omg.org Subject: Fw: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue This feels like an abuse of Comment. Is there some subclass of NamedElement that could be stereotyped to meet the needs without introducing semantics to comments they way Java did with annotations? ----- Forwarded by Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM on 02/03/2009 11:50 AM ----- From: Juergen Boldt To: issues@omg.org, uml2-rtf@omg.org Date: 02/03/2009 11:42 AM Subject: issue 13425 - UML 2 RTF issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 03 Feb 2009 05:12:14 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Tim Weilkiens Company: oose Innovative Informatik GmbH mailFrom: tim.weilkiens@oose.de Notification: Yes Specification: UML Superstructure Section: 7.3.9 Comment should be NamedElement FormalNumber: ptc/2008-05-05 Version: 2.2 RevisionDate: 05/05/2008 Page: 57 ff. Nature: Enhancement Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; GTB5; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) Description I propose to define the Comment as a NamedElement instead of Element. The SysML and UPDM working groups identified that it is necessary that comment based model elements have a name, could be packaged and identified. 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