Issue 18811: MOF issue - MOF says nothing about the semantics of operation redefinition (mof2core-rtf)
Source: Model Driven Solutions (Mr. Steve Cook, steve-c(at)modeldriven.org)
Nature: Revision
Severity: 
Summary: UML uses operation redefinition quite extensively, but MOF says nothing about what this means, and UML itself leaves it rather open – see for example issues 17924 and 15499.  UML 2.5 beta leaves it even more open than 2.4.1, which means that MOF needs to be specific for UML to be well-defined.

 

My suggestion is that MOF requires parameters in redefined operations to have the same number, type, multiplicity, uniqueness and ordering as the parameters in the operation being redefined.

Resolution: MOF issue - MOF says nothing about the semantics of operation redefinition

Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
July 10, 2013: received issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====

m: Steve Cook <Steve.Cook@microsoft.com>
To: "issues@omg.org" <issues@omg.org>
Subject: MOF issue - MOF says nothing about the semantics of operation
 redefinition
Thread-Topic: MOF issue - MOF says nothing about the semantics of operation
 redefinition
Thread-Index: Ac59g0RqIS5+50VjSy6SJtERLIKXdQ==
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:40:25 +0000
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.166.18.102]
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: 
 CIP:131.107.125.37;CTRY:US;IPV:CAL;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(189002)(199002)(49866001)(46102001)(15202345003)(20776003)(6806003)(16236675002)(47446002)(54316002)(65816001)(16406001)(80022001)(76796001)(63696002)(47976001)(81542001)(77982001)(50986001)(76176001)(54356001)(76786001)(33656001)(56776001)(83072001)(77096001)(55846006)(71186001)(79102001)(74502001)(44976004)(512954002)(69226001)(4396001)(74706001)(53806001)(74366001)(76482001)(56816003)(74662001)(31966008)(19300405004)(51856001)(47736001)(59766001)(74876001)(81342001);DIR:OUT;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:BL2FFO11HUB021;H:TK5EX14HUBC106.redmond.corp.microsoft.com;CLIP:131.107.125.37;RD:InfoDomainNonexistent;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en;
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.onmicrosoft.com
X-O365ENT-EOP-Header: Message processed by -  O365_ENT: Allow from ranges
 (Engineering ONLY)
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0903DD1D85
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org


UML uses operation redefinition quite extensively, but MOF says nothing about what this means, and UML itself leaves it rather open . see for example issues 17924 and 15499.  UML 2.5 beta leaves it even more open than 2.4.1, which means that MOF needs to be specific for UML to be well-defined.

 

My suggestion is that MOF requires parameters in redefined operations to have the same number, type, multiplicity, uniqueness and ordering as the parameters in the operation being redefined.