Issue 16428: Some Derived Associations Should Be Composite (alf-rtf)
Source: Model Driven Solutions (Mr. Ed Seidewitz, ed-s(at)modeldriven.com)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: Clauses: All of Part III on Abstract Syntax

Derived associations whose derivations create new syntax elements, rather than referring to existing elements in the abstract syntax tree (e.g., ExtentOrExpression::expression) should be composition associations. This makes the ownership of these derived elements clear for the purpose of walking the abstract syntax tree to check static semantic constraints.

Resolution: The FTF agrees that this is an issue worth considering, but, due to lack of time, decided to defer its resolution to a future RTF working on this specification.
Revised Text: None
Disposition:	Deferred

Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
July 29, 2011: received issue
October 5, 2012: deferred
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
ssues with Action Language for Foundational UML (Alf) Beta 1 specification (ptc/2010-10-05)

Submitted by Ed Seidewitz (ed-s@modeldriven.com)

This is issue # 16428

Some Derived Associations Should Be Composite

Clauses: All of Part III on Abstract Syntax

Derived associations whose derivations create new syntax elements, rather than referring to existing elements in the abstract syntax tree (e.g., ExtentOrExpression::expression) should be composition associations. This makes the ownership of these derived elements clear for the purpose of walking the abstract syntax tree to check static semantic constraints.