Issue 14925: Figures 34, 51, and others use UML interface realization without UML semantics (soaml-rtf) Source: NIST (Mr. Conrad Bock, conrad.bock(at)nist.gov) Nature: Revision Severity: Critical Summary: Figures 34, 51, and others use UML interface realization notation (hollow headed arrowhead, dashed line) but has an external protocol on the tail of the arrow, rather than an implementation of the interface (ie, methods for the operations defined in the interface). Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: January 6, 2010: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 06 Jan 2010 15:24:31 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Conrad Bock Company: NIST mailFrom: conrad.bock@nist.gov Notification: Yes Specification: Service oriented architecture Modeling Language Section: 7 soaML UML Profile FormalNumber: ptc/2009-04-01 Version: RevisionDate: Page: Title: Figures 7.2 and 7.42 use UML interface realization without UML semantics Nature: Revision Severity: Critical test: 3qw8 B1: Report Issue Description: Figures 7.2 and 7.42 use the UML interface realization notation (hollow headed arrowhead, dashed line) but has an external protocol on the tail of the arrow, rather than an implementation of the interface (ie, From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Juergen Boldt Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 11:01:42 -0500 Subject: RE: issue 14922 - 14925 -- SoaML FTF issues, corrections Thread-Topic: issue 14922 - 14925 -- SoaML FTF issues, corrections Thread-Index: AcqUjIS+0vGU5GUWQdeCzNQ3119BJwApGIUA Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US X-NIST-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-NIST-MailScanner-From: conrad.bock@nist.gov X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id o0EFu5j8025577 Juergen, > sure.. Here are the updates for soaML issues 14922-14925. Thx, Conrad On issues 14922 through 14925, change these fields: - Document name to "soaML Beta 2". - Document number to ptc/09-11-13. Issue 14922: Title: Figure 95 uses instance keyword instead of part Figure 95 uses instance keyword, which isn't defined in UML. The figure isn't explained well, but perhaps it could use the part keyword, or extend UML with a port keyword. Issue 14923: Title: Figure 95 extends activity execution semantics Figure 95 isn't explained very well, but from other conversations it seems to assume the runtime target of invocation actions can be derived from the the partition. While port/part partitions require the target input of invocation actions to be the runtime value of a specific property represented by the partition, they do not have the execution semantics to assign the value. This could be described in soaML as an extension of UML semantics. Probably affected by next issue. Issue 14924: Title: Figure 95 uses UML ports without UML semantics Figure 95 isn't explained very well, but from other conversations it seems to assume partitions representing ports have (references to) external objects as runtime values, where the external objects are the ones at the other end of the connector coming into the port from outside. This is assumed so the invocation actions can send these external objects operation calls based on the partitions they are in ( the partitions represent port properties, which means the runtime value of the ports must be the runtime input values of invocation actions in the partition). However, ports are composite properties, see constraint [2] on ports, which means external objects that are values of ports would be deleted with when the runtime owner of the port is. For example, deleting a buyer object would delete the seller object at runtime. In addition, it would be a very rare user of UML that would assume an externally connected port connector had as its value the object at the other end of the connector. This is very far from UML, with significant unintended consequences. soaML could define an extension of UML for port partitions to give the semantics of InvocationAction:onPort with input pin targeting "self". Then the operation calls would go through the port represented by the partition to the external object. Issue 14925: Title: Figures 34, 51, and others use UML interface realization without UML semantics Figures 34, 51, and others use UML interface realization notation (hollow headed arrowhead, dashed line) but has an external protocol on the tail of the arrow, rather than an implementation of the interface methods for the operations defined in the interface).