Issue 14626: UML2 - definition of Property.opposite is wrong (uml2-rtf)
Source: Microsoft (Mr. Steve Cook, stcook(at)microsoft.com)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Currently the spec says:

 

If this property is owned by a class associated with a binary association, and the other end of the association is also owned by a class, then opposite gives the other end. 

 

opposite = if owningAssociation->isEmpty() and association.memberEnd->size() = 2 then let otherEnd = (association.memberEnd - self)->any() in if otherEnd.owningAssociation->isEmpty() then otherEnd else Set{} endif else Set {} endif

 

This is wrong.  The opposite should be calculated properly whatever the property is owned by.  It should say “if the property is an association end of a binary association, opposite gives the other end”.

 


Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
November 13, 2009: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====

m: Steve Cook <Steve.Cook@microsoft.com>
To: "issues@omg.org" <issues@omg.org>
Subject: UML2 - definition of Property.opposite is wrong
Thread-Topic: UML2 - definition of Property.opposite is wrong
Thread-Index: AcpkVqtzIbJ8gweMTgS1IKuyYOnnOQ==
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:44:33 +0000
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 


Currently the spec says:

 

If this property is owned by a class associated with a binary association, and the other end of the association is also owned by a class, then opposite gives the other end. 

 

opposite = if owningAssociation->isEmpty() and association.memberEnd->size() = 2 then let otherEnd = (association.memberEnd - self)->any() in if otherEnd.owningAssociation->isEmpty() then otherEnd else Set{} endif else Set {} endif

 

This is wrong.  The opposite should be calculated properly whatever the property is owned by.  It should say .if the property is an association end of a binary association, opposite gives the other end..

 

Thanks

 -- Steve