Issue 16129: Issue nnnn: Japan PAS Ballot Comment 6 (ocl2-rtf) (ocl2-rtf)
Source: Fujitsu (Mr. Tom Rutt, tom(at)coastin.com)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: There are same element names in both OCL and UML. Those are confusing. I wonder whether those are UML elements or OCL elements. Besides, it seems there is no clear distinction between UML/OCL (upper case letter) term and general term (lower case letter), since these are used in mixture.
- It is confusing to distinguish OCL “Constraint” from UML “Constraint” in the text. Furthermore, there are some “constraint” s (in a lower case letter). The lower case letter/upper case letters for “constraint” are mixed. 
OCL “Constraint” should be distinguishable from UML “Constrain”.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
April 20, 2011: received issue
Discussion: 
See comment JP 6 in “…_JISC.doc”  file in http://www.omg.org/members/cgi-bin/doc?pas/11-03-03.zip Initial Comment/Suggestion: : OCL “Constraint” should be distinguishable from UML
“Constraint”.
Comment: In fact OCL do not define the concept of Constraint since this concept is taken from UML. So
there is no need to distinguish them since they are the same concept.
A more detailed check to the spec is needed to see if this issue requires any change.
Disposition: Deferred
End of Annotations:=====
s is issue # 16129


Issue 16129: Japan PAS Ballot Comment 6 (ocl2-rtf)

Click here for this issue's archive. 
Nature: Issue from PAS Ballot comment for ISO/IEC DIS 19507
Severity: 
Summary: 

See comment JP 6 in .._JISC.doc.  file in http://www.omg.org/members/cgi-bin/doc?pas/11-03-03.zip
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken: