Issue 17219: figure still uses &lt;&lt;conformsTo&gt;&gt; &lt;&lt;transformation&gt;&gt; and &lt;&lt;instanceOf&gt;&gt; applied to lines using the Dependency notation (sysml-modelica-rtf)
Source: Adaptive (Mr. Pete Rivett, pete.rivett(at)adaptive.com)
Nature: Revision
Severity: 
Summary: the new figure still uses &lt;&lt;conformsTo&gt;&gt; &lt;&lt;transformation&gt;&gt; and &lt;&lt;instanceOf&gt;&gt; applied to lines using the Dependency notation. These have no defined meaning (either as keywords nor as stereotypes defined either in this specification, SysML or UML). Whatever &lt;&lt;instanceOf&gt;&gt; means it’s not the case that a transformationRecord is an instance of a transformation. If these stereotypes are retained there should be an explanation to say they are purely informal


Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
March 9, 2012: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
s is issue # 17219 From: "Pete Rivett" <pete.rivett@adaptive.com>

figure still uses <<conformsTo>> <<transformation>> and <<instanceOf>> applied to lines using the Dependency notation

the new figure still uses <<conformsTo>> <<transformation>> and <<instanceOf>> applied to lines using the Dependency notation. These have no defined meaning (either as keywords nor as stereotypes defined either in this specification, SysML or UML). Whatever <<instanceOf>> means it.s not the case that a transformationRecord is an instance of a transformation. If these stereotypes are retained there should be an explanation to say they are purely informal