Issue 17254: 9.3.2.8 FullPort (sysml-rtf) Source: No Magic, Inc. (Mr. Nerijus Jankevicius, nerijus(at)nomagic.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: 9.3.2.8 FullPort - in description it says it cannot be conjugated. 1. Why? 2. Why there is no constraint for that? what constraint 2 means? when binding connector is connector to proxy port? Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: March 20, 2012: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== s is issue # 17254 From: Nerijus Jankevicius 9.3.2.8 FullPort 9.3.2.8 FullPort - in description it says it cannot be conjugated. 1. Why? 2. Why there is no constraint for that? what constraint 2 means? when binding connector is connector to proxy port? From: "BERNARD, Yves" To: "Sysml-Rtf (sysml-rtf@omg.org)" Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:47:45 +0100 Subject: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Topic: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Index: Ac3DBX/7NNG95yFlRR+EuJtutbfzvg== Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US I remember we wrote the constraint#2 as it is because of the ability to bind a proxy port to a full port. So it should be reworded: [2] Binding connectors cannot link full ports to other composite properties of the block owning the port, except proxy ports. Yves The information in this e-mail is confidential. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee. Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Airbus immediately and delete this e-mail. Airbus cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this e-mail as it has been sent over public networks. If you have any concerns over the content of this message or its Accuracy or Integrity, please contact Airbus immediately. All outgoing e-mails from Airbus are checked using regularly updated virus scanning software but you should take whatever measures you deem to be appropriate to ensure that this message and any attachments are virus free. From: "Bock, Conrad" To: "Sysml-Rtf (sysml-rtf@omg.org)" Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:06:49 -0500 Subject: RE: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Topic: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Index: Ac3DBX/7NNG95yFlRR+EuJtutbfzvgAMG2lw Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Yves, > I remember we wrote the constraint#2 as it is because of the ability to bind > a proxy port to a full port. So it should be reworded: Yes, which is why 1.3 says "except non-full ports", but the modeler needs to be careful because proxy ports are typically bound to internal parts or declared to behavioral, so binding a full port to a proxy would makes its value equal to an internal part property or self. How about: Binding connectors cannot link full ports to other composite properties of the block owning the port, except non-full ports that are not behavioral or bound to internal parts. ? Conrad From: "BERNARD, Yves" To: "Bock, Conrad" CC: "Sysml-Rtf (sysml-rtf@omg.org)" Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 15:35:08 +0100 Subject: RE: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Topic: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Index: Ac3DBX/7NNG95yFlRR+EuJtutbfzvgAMG2lwADOf6BA= Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id qAGEZZRE020527 Conrad, In the context of the sentence it is not clear to me what "or bound to internal parts" exactly means. Furthermore "internal part" is a kind of euphemism we used to designate parts which are not full ports. It could be worth to provide the OCL for this constraint. But we could also consider that the Constraint#1 we added to BindingConnectors is sufficient to prevent any misuse: [1] The two ends of a binding connector must have either the same type or types that are compatible so that equality of their values can be defined. Otherwise, your comment lets me though that we should maybe add a constraint to proxy ports so that they cannot be at the end of an internal connector of their owner if they are behavioral. Yves -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: jeudi 15 novembre 2012 15:07 To: Sysml-Rtf (sysml-rtf@omg.org) Subject: RE: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Yves, > I remember we wrote the constraint#2 as it is because of the ability to bind > a proxy port to a full port. So it should be reworded: Yes, which is why 1.3 says "except non-full ports", but the modeler needs to be careful because proxy ports are typically bound to internal parts or declared to behavioral, so binding a full port to a proxy would makes its value equal to an internal part property or self. How about: Binding connectors cannot link full ports to other composite properties of the block owning the port, except non-full ports that are not behavioral or bound to internal parts. ? Conrad This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. The information in this e-mail is confidential. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee. Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Airbus immediately and delete this e-mail. Airbus cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this e-mail as it has been sent over public networks. If you have any concerns over the content of this message or its Accuracy or Integrity, please contact Airbus immediately. All outgoing e-mails from Airbus are checked using regularly updated virus scanning software but you should take whatever measures you deem to be appropriate to ensure that this message and any attachments are virus free. From: "Bock, Conrad" To: "Sysml-Rtf (sysml-rtf@omg.org)" Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:42:31 -0500 Subject: RE: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Topic: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Index: Ac3DBX/7NNG95yFlRR+EuJtutbfzvgAMG2lwADOf6BAAANgrsA== Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Yves, > In the context of the sentence it is not clear to me what "or bound > to internal parts" exactly means. Furthermore "internal part" is a > kind of euphemism we used to designate parts which are not full > ports. It could be worth to provide the OCL for this constraint. Perhaps, but this is about the level of precision of other constraints, but could reword like this: Binding connectors cannot link full ports to other composite properties of the block owning the port, except non-full ports that are not behavioral or that are connected by bindings to parts that are not ports. > we could also consider that the Constraint#1 we added to > BindingConnectors is sufficient to prevent any misuse: > > [1] The two ends of a binding connector must have either the same type or > types that are compatible so that equality of their values can be defined. How would this prevent binding a full port to a proxy that is bound to an internal part? > Otherwise, your comment lets me though that we should maybe add a constraint > to proxy ports so that they cannot be at the end of an internal connector of > their owner if they are behavioral. Properties can be typed by their owning block and have the owning instance as values. Conrad From: "BERNARD, Yves" To: "Bock, Conrad" , "Sysml-Rtf (sysml-rtf@omg.org)" Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:28:56 +0100 Subject: RE: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Topic: [Ballot 3] #17254 "Full port" Thread-Index: Ac3DBX/7NNG95yFlRR+EuJtutbfzvgAMG2lwADOf6BAAANgrsAACqtCw Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR, en-US Conrad, Binding connectors cannot link full ports to other composite properties of the block owning the port, except non-full ports that are not behavioral or that are connected by bindings to parts that are not ports. [BERNARD, Yves] Yes, this is clearer to me. But this makes possible to bind a (full) port to something that is not a port. How can this be possible according to BindingConnector's constaint#1? > > [1] The two ends of a binding connector must have either the same type or > types that are compatible so that equality of their values can be defined. How would this prevent binding a full port to a proxy that is bound to an internal part? [BERNARD, Yves] It won't... As long as "the equality of their values can be defined" :o) Is there anything special here compared to a "regular" (i.e. non port) part? > Otherwise, your comment lets me though that we should maybe add a constraint > to proxy ports so that they cannot be at the end of an internal connector of > their owner if they are behavioral. Properties can be typed by their owning block and have the owning instance as values. [BERNARD, Yves] Not clear to me. See the diagram in the attached slide. Conrad This mail has originated outside your organization, either from an external partner or the Global Internet. Keep this in mind if you answer this message. The information in this e-mail is confidential. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee. Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify Airbus immediately and delete this e-mail. Airbus cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this e-mail as it has been sent over public networks. If you have any concerns over the content of this message or its Accuracy or Integrity, please contact Airbus immediately. All outgoing e-mails from Airbus are checked using regularly updated virus scanning software but you should take whatever measures you deem to be appropriate to ensure that this message and any attachments are virus free. ProxyPort_constraint.ppt