Issue 18744: Correct CMOF file to MOF/XMI version 2.4 (express-rtf) Source: Microsoft (Mr. Steve Cook, stcook(at)microsoft.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: I am puzzled by the use of the cmof: namespace in the cmof file. At version 2.4.1 it is normal to use UML XMI files for metamodels – see, for example, the UML 2.4.1 metamodel itself (http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/20110701/UML.xmi). I believe there is a fundamental misunderstanding here – from 2.4 onwards there is no longer any special cmof format. I think that simply deleting all of the MagicDraw-specific content from 13-05-34 would give almost all of what you want; you would perhaps then need a mof:Tag for nsPrefix to make it a correct metamodel. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: May 30, 2013: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: "Barkmeyer, Edward J" To: "issues@omg.org" Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 18:37:45 -0400 Subject: New EXPRESS MM Issue -- Correct CMOF file to MOF/XMI version 2.4 Thread-Topic: New EXPRESS MM Issue -- Correct CMOF file to MOF/XMI version 2.4 Thread-Index: Ac5cvLY5g5lh8uKJQnSffh71wWvGvA== Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Specification: EXPRESS Metamodel Version: 1.0 Title: Correct CMOF file to MOF/XMI version 2.4 Source: Steve Cook, Microsoft (for the AB), steve.cook@microsoft.com Summary: I am puzzled by the use of the cmof: namespace in the cmof file. At version 2.4.1 it is normal to use UML XMI files for metamodels . see, for example, the UML 2.4.1 metamodel itself (http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/20110701/UML.xmi). I believe there is a fundamental misunderstanding here . from 2.4 onwards there is no longer any special cmof format. I think that simply deleting all of the MagicDraw-specific content from 13-05-34 would give almost all of what you want; you would perhaps then need a mof:Tag for nsPrefix to make it a correct metamodel.