Issue 18837: Annex E lacks sub-clauses for the XMI details for StandardProfile and UMLDI (issues) Source: NASA (Dr. Nicolas F. Rouquette, nicolas.f.rouquette(at)jpl.nasa.gov) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Provide sub-clauses like the resolution for issue 18831 Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: July 31, 2013: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: "Rouquette, Nicolas F (313K)" To: Juergen Boldt Subject: Re: Annex E vs. 1st page Thread-Topic: Annex E vs. 1st page Thread-Index: AQHOjfcZ3XRdxMYRvkGpBe5YOI/oqZl/S9aA//+SN4A= Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:48:18 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.4.130416 x-originating-ip: [128.149.137.113] X-Source-Sender: nicolas.f.rouquette@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Authorized X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Yes. Title: Annex E lacks sub-clauses for the XMI details for StandardProfile and UMLDI. Summary: Provide sub-clauses like the resolution for issue 18831. - Nicolas. From: Juergen Boldt Date: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 7:21 AM To: Nicolas Rouquette Subject: Re: Annex E vs. 1st page Should I just file the second sentence as the issue? -Juergen At 10:06 AM 7/31/2013, you wrote: The first page should be updated so that the machine-readable files point to 20131001 instead of 20120801 currently. Also, Annex E lacks sub-clauses for the XMI details for StandardProfile and UMLDI. Do we need an issue to change these things? - Nicolas. Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services 109 Highland Ave Needham, MA 02494 USA Tel: 781 444 0404 x 132 fax: 781 444 0320 www.omg.org [] From: "Bock, Conrad" To: "uml25-ftf@omg.org" Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:03:02 -0400 Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Thread-Topic: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Thread-Index: Ac6OB28fmww3Z6BDQreB0DlXgSBlHw== Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Nicolas, et al, > Since there is an active DD 1.1 RTF whose due date is December 2013, I think > we should raise an issue against DD 1.1 and make sure they publish it in > terms of XMI 2.5 That was the plan for December, but I guess that's too late. The DD RTF has no chair now that Maged left. The likelihood I could handle the upgrade in time (either technically or managerially) is small. Does anyone know what it would involve? Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: "uml25-ftf@omg.org" Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:11:02 -0400 Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF/XMI version Thread-Topic: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF/XMI version Thread-Index: Ac6OCDXFrUdSdZrfREaW8RTUYjgNQw== Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Steve, > Do we have to publish an XMI2.5 version of it for our own needs? If there's going to be a MOF/XMI 2.5, then to align UML 2.5 and DI 1.1 they would need to come out at the same time, wouldn't they? X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:TK5EX14MLTC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com;RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com;EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -12 X-BigFish: VS-12(z21cRz125fI542Izz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz1de098h17326ah1de096h8275dh1de097hz2fh2a8h668h839h944hd25hf0ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h1b0ah1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) From: Steve Cook To: "Bock, Conrad" , "uml25-ftf@omg.org" Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Thread-Topic: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Thread-Index: Ac6OB28fmww3Z6BDQreB0DlXgSBlHwAAJupw Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:16:38 +0000 Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.166.18.104] X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id r6VGGr2n024481 When we cross-reference DI from UMLDI we need the existence of something like http://www.omg.org/spec/DD/20131201/DI.xmi I'm not sure how legal it would be from the OMG's perspective to postulate the existence of something like that in advance. But that's the trouble with all of these cyclically dependent specs - either we publish them all simultaneously, which is unfeasible, or we have version-independent references, which we haven't yet invented. -- Steve -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: 31 July 2013 17:03 To: uml25-ftf@omg.org Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Nicolas, et al, > Since there is an active DD 1.1 RTF whose due date is December 2013, I think > we should raise an issue against DD 1.1 and make sure they publish it in > terms of XMI 2.5 That was the plan for December, but I guess that's too late. The DD RTF has no chair now that Maged left. The likelihood I could handle the upgrade in time (either technically or managerially) is small. Does anyone know what it would involve? Conrad X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:131.107.125.8;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:TK5EX14HUBC101.redmond.corp.microsoft.com;RD:autodiscover.service.exchange.microsoft.com;EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -11 X-BigFish: VS-11(z21cRz542Izz1f42h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ah1fc6hzz1de098h8275dh1de097hz2fh2a8h668h839h944hd25hf0ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h1b0ah1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dfeh1dffh1e1dh1155h) From: Steve Cook To: "Bock, Conrad" , "uml25-ftf@omg.org" Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF/XMI version Thread-Topic: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF/XMI version Thread-Index: Ac6OCDXFrUdSdZrfREaW8RTUYjgNQwAATH3w Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:17:56 +0000 Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.166.18.104] X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn% X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id r6VGINHW024592 Yes, unless we come to some agreement about the future URI and refer to things that don't exist yet. -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: 31 July 2013 17:11 To: uml25-ftf@omg.org Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF/XMI version Steve, > Do we have to publish an XMI2.5 version of it for our own needs? If there's going to be a MOF/XMI 2.5, then to align UML 2.5 and DI 1.1 they would need to come out at the same time, wouldn't they? Conrad From: "Rouquette, Nicolas F (313K)" To: Steve Cook , "Bock, Conrad" , "uml25-ftf@omg.org" Subject: Re: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Thread-Topic: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version Thread-Index: Ac6OB28fmww3Z6BDQreB0DlXgSBlHwAAJupwAAFC4AA= Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:43:31 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.4.130416 x-originating-ip: [128.149.137.113] X-Source-Sender: nicolas.f.rouquette@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Authorized X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id r6VGhgSi029424 When I produced the XMI for UML 2.5 Beta1, the QVTO workflow processed the transitive closure of UML + UMLDI dependencies, this means that it also processed DI and DC but not DG (DG imports DC) I could easily update the workflow to include DG. So, if someone updates the metamodels for DI, DC, DG, I can produce the XMI for DD 1.1 with the same workflow. - Nicolas. On 7/31/13 9:16 AM, "Steve Cook" wrote: >When we cross-reference DI from UMLDI we need the existence of something >like > >http://www.omg.org/spec/DD/20131201/DI.xmi > >I'm not sure how legal it would be from the OMG's perspective to >postulate the existence of something like that in advance. But that's >the trouble with all of these cyclically dependent specs - either we >publish them all simultaneously, which is unfeasible, or we have >version-independent references, which we haven't yet invented. > > -- Steve > >-----Original Message----- >From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] >Sent: 31 July 2013 17:03 >To: uml25-ftf@omg.org >Subject: RE: issue 18837 -- UML 2.5 FTF issue, UML DI MOF version > >Nicolas, et al, > > > Since there is an active DD 1.1 RTF whose due date is December 2013, I >think > we should raise an issue against DD 1.1 and make sure they >publish it in > terms of XMI 2.5 > >That was the plan for December, but I guess that's too late. The DD RTF >has no chair now that Maged left. The likelihood I could handle the >upgrade in time (either technically or managerially) is small. Does >anyone know what it would involve? > >Conrad > >