Issue 15770: Restructuring of chapters (uml-testing-profile-rtf) Source: Fraunhofer FOKUS (Mr. Marc-Florian Wendland, marc-florian.wendland(at)fokus.fraunhofer.de) Nature: Revision Severity: Minor Summary: The structure of the specification is erroneous in a way, that is not clear why some parts, belonging to the same topic, have been extracted into an own subsection: Issues with section 6.4 and 6.5: Section 6.4 “MOF-based Metamodel” consists of the subsection 6.4.1 “Test Architecture and Behavior” solely. Except that using a single, numbered subsection is not a good style, the sibling section 6.5 “Test Data” must belong to section 6.4, henceforth referred as subsection 6.4.2 “Test Data”. Additionally, the subsection 6.5.1 “Time Concepts” is rather a sibling subsection to 6.4.1 and 6.4.2, resulting in 6.4.3 “Time Concepts”, so that the logically more correct structure is like: 6.4 “MOF-based Metamodel” -6.4.1 Test Architecture and Test Behavior -6.4.2 Test Data -6.4.3 Timer Concepts Issues with section 6.6 and 6.7: Section 6.6 “Examples” describes a comprehensive usage example of UTP. Since chapter 6 should be dedicated to the definition of the profile’s concepts solely, section 6.6 should be extracted either to a new chapter 7 or to the appendix (as it is often done in other MOF-related specifications). Section 6.7 “Mapping” should remain as section 6.6, since it definitely belongs to the specification of the profile. Resolution: The RTF agreed on that the current outline of the specification is not ideal to read and to maintain. In order to improve both, a new structure for the UTP 1.1 specification was proposed, targeting - the elimination of redundant sections - a clear numbering of the sections so that they can be directly and precisely referred - to shift any accompanying material in the specification from the normative sections into the non-normative sections (Annexes) - the introduction of a common schema for the meta element descriptions, like it is done in UML, SysML or MARTE, which is used for each meta element Revised Text: Apply the following changes to the outline: - Add a new chapter 5 “Symbols and acronyms” after chapter 4 “Terms and definitions” - Change current chapter 5 to chapter 6 - Change current chapter 6 to chapter 7 and rename it to “The UML Testing Profile (UTP)” - Make current sections 6.1 and 6.2 to unnumbered sections - Remove current section 6.3 and position its current subsections directly underneath chapter 7 o 6.3.1 -> 7.1 o 6.3.2 -> 7.2 o 6.3.3 -> 7.3 o 6.3.4 -> 7.4 - Move current section 6.4 to Annex C o Mark new Annex C as non-normative o Add a line to the very beginning of new Annex C: “The UTP MOF-based metamodel is obsolete since version 1.1 and will not be further maintained.” - Move current section 6.5 into Annex C and make it a subsection of it - Move current section 6.6 to Annex B o Declare Annex B as normative - Move current section 6.7 to Annex A o Declare Annex A as normative - Remove Annex A from the specification to avoid redundancy - Change current Annex B to Annex E Include two subsections “Abstract Syntax” and “Stereotype Descriptions” into each package of the UTP. Whereas the abstract syntax contains the stereotypes and their relationships (like in UML), the Stereotye descriptions are further structured. The structure for each stereotyped is similar to the UML class descriptions. It contains the following paragraphs: • Description: A rather general description of the element (just a few words) • Extensions: List to UML Classes, this stereotype extends (full qualified UML namespace name) • Generalizations: List of stereotypes, this stereotype specializes o In case no attributes section was mentioned for an already existing concept, use “None.”. • Attributes: List of additional attributes for this stereotype o In case no Attributes section was mentioned for an already existing concept, use “None.”. • Semantics: Detailed semantic description of the stereotype and the concept related to it • Constraints: Constraints expressed as both natural and formal (OCL) language, if possible o In case no constraints section was mentioned for an already existing concept, use “None.”. • Notation: Information regarding graphical representation of the stereotype o In case no notation section was mentioned for an already existing concept, use the sentence “No additional notation for «StereotypeName» defined”. • Examples: Usage examples or references to those o In case no examples section was mentioned for an already existing concept, use “None.”. The new structure is exemplarily outlined below: 1. Scope 2. Conformance 2.1 Summary of optional versus mandatory features 2.2 Proposed compliance points 3. Normative reference 4. Terms and definitions 5. Symbols 6. Additional information 6.1 Acknowledgements 6.2 Guide to material in the specification 7. The UML Testing Profile 7.1 Test Architecture 7.1.1 Abstract Syntax 7.1.2 Stereotype Descriptions 7.1.2.1 Stereotype name • Description: Extensions: List to UML Classes, this stereotype extends (full qualified UML namespace name) • Generalizations: List of stereotypes, this stereotype specializes • Attributes: List of additional attributes for this stereotype • Semantics: Detailed semantic description of the stereotype and the concept related to it • Constraints: Constraints expressed as both natural and formal (OCL) language, if possible • Notation: Information regarding graphical representation of the stereotype • Examples: Usage examples or references to those 7.2 Test Behavior 7.2.1 Abstract Syntax 7.2.2 Stereotype Descriptions (Stereotype description as done in 7.1.2.1) 7.3 Test Data 7.3.1 Abstract Syntax 7.3.2 Stereotype Descriptions (Stereotype description as done in 7.1.2.1) 7.4 Timer Concepts 7.4.1 Abstract Syntax 7.4.2 Stereotype Descriptions (Stereotype description as done in 7.1.2.1) A Mappings A.1 Mapping to JUnit A.2 Mapping to TTCN-3 B Examples B.1 Money Example B.2 Bank ATM Example B.3 Money Transfer Example C MOF-based Metamodel D Arbiter and Scheduler Protocol E XMI Schema E.1 The Profile E.2 The MOF-based Metamodel Remove any the word phrases “X extends Y” from the description paragraph of each stereotypes. Since the UML metaclass that is extended by this stereotype is precisely defined within the extensions paragraph (by giving the full qualified name of the metaclass within the UML Superstructure), those word phrases are redundant and inconvenient to read. This affects description paragraphs of stereotypes - SUT - TestLog - TimeOut - TimeOutMessage - TimeOutAction Disposition: Resolved Actions taken: October 22, 2010: received issue October 21, 2011: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 22 Oct 2010 02:21:58 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Marc-Florian Wendland Employer: Fraunhofer Institut FOKUS mailFrom: marc-florian.wendland@fokus.frraunhofer.de Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: UML Testing Profile Section: 6.4,6.5,6.6,6.7 FormalNumber: formal/05-07-07 Version: 1.0 Doc_Year: 2005 Doc_Month: July Doc_Day: 07 Page: 37-79 Title: Restructuring of chapters Nature: Revision Severity: Minor CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Description: Description ######################################## The structure of the specification is erroneous in a way, that is not clear why some parts, belonging to the same topic, have been extracted into an own subsection: Issues with section 6.4 and 6.5: Section 6.4 .MOF-based Metamodel. consists of the subsection 6.4.1 .Test Architecture and Behavior. solely. Except that using a single, numbered subsection is not a good style, the sibling section 6.5 .Test Data. must belong to section 6.4, henceforth referred as subsection 6.4.2 .Test Data.. Additionally, the subsection 6.5.1 .Time Concepts. is rather a sibling subsection to 6.4.1 and 6.4.2, resulting in 6.4.3 .Time Concepts., so that the logically more correct structure is like: 6.4 .MOF-based Metamodel. -6.4.1 Test Architecture and Test Behavior -6.4.2 Test Data -6.4.3 Timer Concepts Issues with section 6.6 and 6.7: Section 6.6 .Examples. describes a comprehensive usage example of UTP. Since chapter 6 should be dedicated to the definition of the profile.s concepts solely, section 6.6 should be extracted either to a new chapter 7 or to the appendix (as it is often done in other MOF-related specifications). Section 6.7 .Mapping. should remain as section 6.6, since it definitely belongs to the specification of the profile.