Issue 16595: MultiplicityElement constraint 1 inconsistent with possible [0..0] multiplicity (uml2-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
Summary: In the description of a MultiplicityElement in the superstructure, constraint 1 claims that 
'upperBound()->notEmpty() implies upperBound() > 0', while in the last paragraph of the semantics, it is declared that a multiplicity of [0..0] is possible. 
These statements are in conflict with each other.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
October 13, 2011: rewceived issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org
Date: 13 Oct 2011 12:04:57 -0400
To: <issues@omg.org>
Subject: Issue/Bug Report


*******************************************************************************
Name:            Joost Doesburg
Employer:        
mailFrom:        joostdoesburg+umlsup@gmail.com
Terms_Agreement: I agree
Specification:   OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), Superstructure
Section:         7.3.32
FormalNumber:     formal/2010-05-05
Version:         2.3
Doc_Year:        Year
Doc_Month:       Month
Doc_Day:         Day
Page:            97-98
Title:           MultiplicityElement constraint 1 inconsistent with possible [0..0] multiplicity
Nature:          Clarification
Severity:        Minor
CODE:            3TMw8
B1:              Report Issue


Description:


In the description of a MultiplicityElement in the superstructure, constraint 1 claims that 
'upperBound()->notEmpty() implies upperBound() > 0', while in the last paragraph of the semantics, it is declared that a multiplicity of [0..0] is possible. 
These statements are in conflict with each other.