Issue 18025: Location: 17.2.4 Notation ExecutionSpecification  p608 - :  Specification of color (uml25-ftf)
Source: Lockheed Martin (Mr. Lenny Delligatti, lenny_delligatti2(at)omg.org)
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Significant
Summary: Description: This clause states, “ExecutionSpecifications are represented as thin rectangles (grey or white) on the lifeline.”  However, this is inconsistent with the idea that UML does not prescribe color for notations

Proposed Resolution:   In place of references to color, we should stick with the convention of using the terms “hollow” to mean the same color as the diagram background and “solid” to mean the same color as the boundary of the node or the path notation.  In the case of overlapping notations (e.g. ExecutionSpecifications), perhaps the spec. can prescribe patterns (e.g. cross-hatch) instead of color.

Resolution: 
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
September 27, 2012: received issue
Discussion: 
Without this, any tool that shaded these a nice pastel would be non-compliant.
End of Annotations:=====
s is issue # 18025

Problem: 17.006

Level: Significant
Type: Contradiction
Location: 17.2.4 Notation ExecutionSpecification  p608
 
Title:  Specification of color
 
Description: This clause states, .ExecutionSpecifications are represented as thin rectangles (grey or white) on the lifeline..  However, this is inconsistent with the idea that UML does not prescribe color for notations
 
Proposed Resolution:   In place of references to color, we should stick with the convention of using the terms .hollow. to mean the same color as the diagram background and .solid. to mean the same color as the boundary of the node or the path notation.  In the case of overlapping notations (e.g. ExecutionSpecifications), perhaps the spec. can prescribe patterns (e.g. cross-hatch) instead of color.
 
Source: Lenny Delligatti
Discussion: 
Without this, any tool that shaded these a nice pastel would be non-compliant.
Michael Jesse Chonoles