Issue 15785: 09-12-09 SoaML 1.0 Beta 2 figure 83 p. 141 (soaml-rtf)
Source: Naval Undersea Warfare Center (Mr. Richard L. Funk, richard.funk(at)navy.mil)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Judging from the rest of the figures in this system I think the AcceptEventActions in this diagram should be modeled as SendSignalActions, instead. The interfaces that define the associated receptions don't appear to be related to these swim lanes as receptions, but rather they appear to be sent by these swim lanes.


Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
October 25, 2010: received issue
Discussion: 


End of Annotations:=====
ubject: 09-12-09 SoaML 1.0 Beta 2 figure 83 p. 141
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 12:22:55 -0400
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: 09-12-09 SoaML 1.0 Beta 2 figure 83 p. 141
Thread-Index: Act0YN6tGKJfHS8gQ8eKd4duFjSqxQ==
From: "Funk, Richard L CIV NUWC NWPT" <richard.funk@navy.mil>
To: <issues@omg.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Oct 2010 16:22:56.0065 (UTC) FILETIME=[E1971B10:01CB7460]


Judging from the rest of the figures in this system I think the AcceptEventActions in this diagram should be modeled as SendSignalActions, instead. The interfaces that define the associated receptions don't appear to be related to these swim lanes as receptions, but rather they appear to be sent by these swim lanes.


Rich Funk
NUWC
401.832.8567 




 smime10.p7s