Issue 19324: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows (uml2-rtf) Source: Change Vision (Mr. Michael Jesse Chonoles, mjchonoles(at)yahoo.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: In the UML 2.5 spec, the reply arrow on sequence diagrams now has two forms. 17.4.4 Notation Message · A reply Message (messageSort equals reply) has a dashed line with either an open or filled arrow head. However, the DI section of the specification, p 754. Only allows the filled arrow head and does not support an option to specify which. This will mean that diagram interchange will not preserve use of the open arrow head (which is the traditional way of doing this) Michael Jesse Chonoles Change-Vision. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: March 31, 2014: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: "Michael Chonoles" To: Cc: "Conrad Bock" , "'Alan Moore'" Subject: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:28:56 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVw== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org In the UML 2.5 spec, the reply arrow on sequence diagrams now has two forms. 17.4.4 Notation Message · A reply Message (messageSort equals reply) has a dashed line with either an open or filled arrow head. However, the DI section of the specification, p 754. Only allows the filled arrow head and does not support an option to specify which. This will mean that diagram interchange will not preserve use of the open arrow head (which is the traditional way of doing this) Michael Jesse Chonoles Change-Vision. From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYA Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 18:33:46 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 016885DD9B x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(189002)(199002)(87936001)(94316002)(80022001)(33646001)(54356001)(74366001)(46102001)(79102001)(47446002)(20776003)(56776001)(85852003)(76482001)(53806001)(80976001)(2656002)(54316002)(81816001)(86362001)(74502001)(81686001)(94946001)(83072002)(92566001)(95666003)(51856001)(31966008)(99286001)(4396001)(47736001)(66066001)(93136001)(47976001)(49866001)(50986001)(59766001)(76576001)(69226001)(76796001)(98676001)(76786001)(77982001)(90146001)(83322001)(56816005)(93516002)(74706001)(85306002)(81542001)(65816001)(77096001)(74876001)(74662001)(95416001)(97336001)(81342001)(74316001)(87266001)(63696002)(97186001)(99396002)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB062;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:BEA6E967.ADE6AC16.22DC628E.648921B1.200BF;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s31IXtld019755 Michael, > In the UML 2.5 spec, the reply arrow on sequence diagrams now has two > forms. Use UMLDiagramElement::isIcon for the filled arrowhead, see the second paragraph under Figure B.3 (UML Diagrams and Diagram Elements). Clause B.6 (UML Notations and UML DI Representations) doesn't cover all notation or all of Appendix B. Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYAABK5mYAAEr/lkA== Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 12:25:00 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 0169092318 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(87936001)(54356001)(80022001)(33646001)(94316002)(74366001)(53806001)(20776003)(79102001)(47446002)(56776001)(76482001)(2656002)(54316002)(81816001)(86362001)(74502001)(81686001)(94946001)(83072002)(92566001)(95666003)(51856001)(31966008)(99286001)(4396001)(47736001)(47976001)(93136001)(77982001)(49866001)(50986001)(59766001)(76576001)(69226001)(76796001)(98676001)(76786001)(93516002)(81542001)(56816005)(74706001)(65816001)(66066001)(85852003)(90146001)(83322001)(77096001)(74876001)(81342001)(558084003)(87266001)(63696002)(97186001)(74316001)(99396002)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB062;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:B6A9CF14.7CF067C2.F5D0B9B6.E4C35EF8.20040;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s32CPJOD026924 > Doesn't quite seem in the spirit of what DI should do. Can you be more specific? Conrad DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396409274; bh=LF0w9JhRS3cvK2vIp4b+C7ZvmXqtvJeoPkzdy40Wf0Y=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=aQipNZygwOx2wa006fM707PWzYiWxokKWVqw1IDaUJrd4WA6pADN2FREAWwmDB3/umMJnovSEn3YbyrrLbmnwsN9CnYWUvUH0amlllSOM5kdBnda6vK1hg7YRjLluuUZcr3XzzwdWgXhdDFjr83VpO2CeOHJB/0XtiiKKki5CyI= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 833148.46687.bm@smtp215.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: C_S0pfEVM1nRgautCpvAXg6xkqJekxaoqFihNBrTNT.nG0P 0XvrtDAMhmu08WVi3CpbK_mQUYPmgFoIfXku5RhJYiptmbOUtwv42HQ6GFYc SuspDpngXq8eZ_1j8vYP77l2owQF48zsa.DmtbW8Yf0R5vu3cFrG_uDfBfOe xG6gIc8xk31Y0ItcAsCRz65sFbNREQTdbazHP04U.jOgKktW9gr.3p0rmV8b ysrxTwdJvjyraBqAG9TkvUZIM5oRQmqbe.bRD4VmWhsWD8IUSfKwkpNrAb49 DD4c2AJSKpGnYKZFJTXLfgA9ZjSO.1r3aJraDl4Hv6bbGmXJ4dJLxPHXFKr8 fW1R4KnkY.trKmLoJ6GIkNvWqdEe7cDuzDalJ6d.uSNpKJu9nnMWa4yocRD_ X6_ZDb_eNHcYk.LJNQb0ToW8LPc1hSUgstkpbg9H_bOqHwG9slmEtAV5TkLH GiEXYKc.cqN9izgGInmsQUoA6yXlByVcx_CSvZGpEn.JF7uX4pphfQAm3nHy 859IRN.vmNN1AnCHx__4zgDm5 X-Yahoo-SMTP: BHehp.2swBCs4PqecFo6LCqjUcnFjw4- X-Rocket-Received: from mjchonolesHP (mjchonoles@71.225.93.40 with plain [63.250.193.228]) by smtp215.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 01 Apr 2014 20:27:54 -0700 PDT From: "Michael Chonoles" To: "'Bock, Conrad'" , Cc: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 23:27:43 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQIFWbqIvejvaWEuWz+bwqSlVqeMRgD9WLynmomotIA= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Doesn't quite seem in the spirit of what DI should do. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:34 PM To: Michael Chonoles; issues@omg.org Cc: 'Alan Moore' Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Michael, > In the UML 2.5 spec, the reply arrow on sequence diagrams now has two > forms. Use UMLDiagramElement::isIcon for the filled arrowhead, see the second paragraph under Figure B.3 (UML Diagrams and Diagram Elements). Clause B.6 (UML Notations and UML DI Representations) doesn't cover all notation or all of Appendix B. Conrad DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396480285; bh=/YgOQj2OMvGn94fN0fhsJRuMbzfkG3Klx8w4DELfOjQ=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=PLuFR11knSZJnwdF08xQAliuVHmxcXJtQdqxToiOKCZywVD/gDbBeEXGNnMNXSECPJH9YxyRRFRULtN9XOq2Ui4RXIrPZZHdvcen3xuXkdS+BNuUrYVNGGylIrLrb/toZ9o9qtZG7U8GWwnBnfFHgWTkX5+kJPaJVEmeJesMdlQ= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 680399.9783.bm@smtp109.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: sqESNwUVM1kfIifurbbDBRuSQxW6YNtEmZA8CWN39se2oD_ AEBnekoVh0yet2WOXQawtZMT9stb.Ly7lLXCQdiSoLq2D46pCzGr0MIuBRx. _06dTGsrNyruwJEIxE0RLj8QdhNCLuD2sR3SUhXSIIe7GgL0izR6Yr4KxnAj G7HHthlDmEYCWruk9KHV9zXWfdn5A47xX5qG1S5pzX1g0PXn14kKgNtfNyJb Q1Cv5PZC04z_iooHgUzFmf9zmS1ZvAa8CSAgwvloFdFx60l9Ooe1xOUALFgo gJHOKT7hBuHaImDxJnwTWHr5jNRkcr9NvivOKDNZfYYbIf7l0lxuqeMLHar6 RgyWMMJpcQAK3gQ0a1TrIXVqNQsMYLPlcu9lRKp.QL4SF08v8ycE1Mpak4E4 E26A.Z0AVYDQql78ouBYXSrUokry.u8Te.iypwVuqBKGF8Lz22DlO2R4oZSC AoPmUAimWe7Bs3W71LhRQrHxNEn_Fj7LFP6bokHYcpX7MqFQw3UkDpkycXfG .A.ieof3y4kcLCXvFfeBhh_Mh X-Yahoo-SMTP: BHehp.2swBCs4PqecFo6LCqjUcnFjw4- X-Rocket-Received: from mjchonolesHP (mjchonoles@71.225.93.40 with plain [63.250.193.228]) by smtp109.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 02 Apr 2014 16:11:25 -0700 PDT From: "Michael Chonoles" To: "'Bock, Conrad'" , Cc: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 19:11:13 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQIFWbqIvejvaWEuWz+bwqSlVqeMRgD9WLynAaIfKUwCL8/cgppsY0Fw X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Well. I would expect it to be specific about what the isIcon would do with reply messages. In fact, when it does discuss isIcon with arrows, the default is open, and the isIcon=true is the solid arrow head -- exactly the opposite of what happens with reply messages. The issue should request that the specification be clear on what happens in reply messages. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 8:25 AM To: Michael Chonoles; issues@omg.org Cc: 'Alan Moore' Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows > Doesn't quite seem in the spirit of what DI should do. Can you be more specific? Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYAABK5mYAAEr/lkAAWlWuAABvM2xA= Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 12:29:54 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 0170DAF08C x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(189002)(199002)(33646001)(47446002)(20776003)(94316002)(80022001)(54356001)(87936001)(31966008)(53806001)(80976001)(2656002)(46102001)(79102001)(56776001)(76482001)(74366001)(95666003)(92566001)(81816001)(81686001)(94946001)(86362001)(74502001)(83072002)(51856001)(54316002)(99286001)(4396001)(47736001)(47976001)(77982001)(74706001)(49866001)(93136001)(50986001)(59766001)(76576001)(69226001)(76796001)(98676001)(76786001)(93516002)(81342001)(74662001)(56816005)(83322001)(81542001)(85852003)(65816001)(85306002)(95416001)(97336001)(97186001)(99396002)(74876001)(77096001)(63696002)(90146001)(74316001)(87266001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB062;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:FA34C555.96FF2F1B.CD526BB8.4495E2C1.2012C;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s33CU3hi001776 Michael, > Well. I would expect it to be specific about what the isIcon would do > with reply messages. There were too many cases, but as far as we could tell, arrows were either open arrowhead or some other (as specified by the notation sections, not DI), so isIcon handles all the cases. DI does not specify notation, only models the interchange. > In fact, when it does discuss isIcon with arrows, the default is open, > and the isIcon=true is the solid arrow head -- exactly the opposite of > what happens with reply messages. The default for isIcon is false, but that doesn't mean the default notation for reply messages is isIcon=false. Conrad DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396538326; bh=puBp4LkuQaTtSCyOKv38VEFZ/uP36OgQ5v6Ukf+qBiY=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=3HhcwEEva5HHL+5+0wjX5H+uwv4PgA1vilIaF1CGMLgHQ8ZhPWyr9mMvwcs+iEN216qA4x5KiwT+Soy1z4EBXT/3vv6MZzjJ4sWHeiB+M/sNaRLMQwF+HqBgIeEk8tojEeWoyEMnBVOBqWG2I9VWS1gkwmC4hQOo9EzW9J4Qhas= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 774489.35459.bm@smtp115.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: .od2ELgVM1ku0s45l8L1DlPtb9hh00punmgzyB2FlNnv_WF z0JkuJd8aAD2VYPan7jvyw8rU2lr0dBNPnaV9YeaaewKLqqUxqmL79EKsUUK EEkXUJbDzTEWKdySGQQKxS7THIyrE.Xh9w_e.Lqfj41zNC_ouJTHBzzQZ0SG iM_rC00K5xWj35FTvAClNeJnCe8nOMCg2GPADaEAgRBGG3fC.UZs88MfxUqq TxGjAnFqIvN2sifSMMdzLgjMHU4zh8P.GdRez3OaAFC9ZOhbKkXB0FEQS1F1 xxPtgombySzXKQYHq_EgEtrPDzqsUvKU5H6OAGBhaJlgsHl6iQ43OB9hsXVV 95TFjcz13uz4k15vG8mx.zdW1NhW4RzCsLoYQLd8Tp.PwpJOx_8aJQPC_Nha 2zBWjm4DAjdq5LVVN4U79JVUQI.lUZXpFPAnthhM2S_OHZ3bfJUFTgdu46o_ pB17qpA8Qi2623SdgvBMpiSCH4ocY81o50HLDUcojm.e0n8zpPwrAthQBJu4 oEdpEeSnC8ECvp9DKGJc- X-Yahoo-SMTP: BHehp.2swBCs4PqecFo6LCqjUcnFjw4- X-Rocket-Received: from mjchonolesHP (mjchonoles@71.225.93.40 with plain [63.250.193.228]) by smtp115.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 03 Apr 2014 08:18:46 -0700 PDT From: "Michael Chonoles" To: "'Bock, Conrad'" , Cc: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:18:33 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQIFWbqIvejvaWEuWz+bwqSlVqeMRgD9WLynAaIfKUwCL8/cggI22KJDAeKwshuaTKWsAA== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org I understand, but the spec is then not sufficiently clear for an implementer to unambiguously determine how to set isIcon a return arrow. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 8:30 AM To: Michael Chonoles; issues@omg.org Cc: 'Alan Moore' Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Michael, > Well. I would expect it to be specific about what the isIcon would do > with reply messages. There were too many cases, but as far as we could tell, arrows were either open arrowhead or some other (as specified by the notation sections, not DI), so isIcon handles all the cases. DI does not specify notation, only models the interchange. > In fact, when it does discuss isIcon with arrows, the default is open, > and the isIcon=true is the solid arrow head -- exactly the opposite of > what happens with reply messages. The default for isIcon is false, but that doesn't mean the default notation for reply messages is isIcon=false. Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYAABK5mYAAEr/lkAAWlWuAABvM2xAABfvIgAAABakw Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 15:21:05 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 0170DAF08C x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(189002)(199002)(54356001)(74706001)(87936001)(77982001)(92566001)(59766001)(33646001)(63696002)(81542001)(66066001)(95666003)(81686001)(99396002)(83322001)(86362001)(53806001)(76786001)(76576001)(74366001)(51856001)(83072002)(54316002)(47446002)(47736001)(87266001)(80976001)(95416001)(76796001)(74662001)(81816001)(93516002)(31966008)(65816001)(46102001)(50986001)(90146001)(98676001)(97186001)(4396001)(47976001)(49866001)(74876001)(85306002)(2656002)(97336001)(77096001)(76482001)(56816005)(94316002)(56776001)(93136001)(85852003)(74502001)(69226001)(80022001)(79102001)(74316001)(81342001)(99286001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB063;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:BF9EF52F.3EF63D5A.786993CC.C4DC0D70.20112;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s33FLDXf020329 > I understand, but the spec is then not sufficiently clear for an > implementer to unambiguously determine how to set isIcon a return arrow. What about the sentence is unclear (in second paragraph under Figure B.3): "It introduces isIcon for modelElements that have an option to be shown with geometric figures other than rectangles, such as Actors, or that have an option to be shown with lines other than solid with open arrow heads, such as Realization." ? Conrad DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396550858; bh=3qpSk7fYv5ofqCISHj6WZO8UERn05vQPRc6AgNy1gMo=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=go1LSScGavUstzyLKi9p5F7PVxj5dn4UKeNonD06a8BVyvjcwECDt6WQeZptpvZbfyhY03FFcniTCRmEcIL1DEf3UK/FIXy2QiVyqoYWqAFZVJKe9Pkk+tWbBqRQmJoHY4OqZUREK2klVvn2tfVPNk+CnsZmsYdu8k46g0ri4gE= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 660385.50819.bm@smtp225.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: hEzhqfYVM1lS_BMwLfMdG.OrsI5YTtr.mj.1lrU2Pc6.WDw AS6XaY3Je5TqZ53uKdPbjyFBjOFSQRDpjw5oZQamLOiwus1sjd6Omq._KqVf kJilHLCBA.V52vBTAGlYuyjIzejR.9au.oWiWTL7ty_eyPktI3FOX_PVd8fg vef1m5k0EcaFamwx_AX6tqbxphfMefW5eyjxe_Y8uj64xtvjanop9jNlq7Fv EHBouVDBDsdjCbhKv7_DvErJoAflkySLo1dpEMsEBuuj4q757Mn5M.Z24cda 3mQO97tjVcg45WJcwOGtS7KZ2jwf0odpGNjY_A7reLQG58YL0M_yAn5sJYGe fNGoZS5s4W1MHgIu02ecM0WYZgKaoXk3T.lP9Pzd8eTrUe4EazTQBO3pvZ.P VY0FdVeIr5N4n74VThpiCP_G0CXJJv1R_.wYDo2teaA0MfF_GeCnkpP.hNF1 11K6lJ_XxHAfjXzrtUQc1S0Da9oH0Aquat8FsGUla0f1quvgFDqg9hTjdOJX KhM6BMzNtL7js1a.pDD6cvLb. X-Yahoo-SMTP: BHehp.2swBCs4PqecFo6LCqjUcnFjw4- X-Rocket-Received: from mjchonolesHP (mjchonoles@71.225.93.40 with plain [63.250.193.228]) by smtp225.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 03 Apr 2014 18:47:38 +0000 UTC From: "Michael Chonoles" To: "'Bock, Conrad'" , Cc: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:47:24 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQIFWbqIvejvaWEuWz+bwqSlVqeMRgD9WLynAaIfKUwCL8/cggI22KJDAeKwshsCZGjT0QIj35pfmiidiZA= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org The discussion seems to indicate that setting the isIcon=true will get you a return arrow with a solid arrow head. >From the example, in the table, it appears that isIcon=false will get you a return arrow with a solid arrow head. Claiming the table is incomplete is about the same as saying it's insufficient by itself. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 11:21 AM To: Michael Chonoles; issues@omg.org Cc: 'Alan Moore' Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows > I understand, but the spec is then not sufficiently clear for an > implementer to unambiguously determine how to set isIcon a return arrow. What about the sentence is unclear (in second paragraph under Figure B.3): "It introduces isIcon for modelElements that have an option to be shown with geometric figures other than rectangles, such as Actors, or that have an option to be shown with lines other than solid with open arrow heads, such as Realization." ? Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYAABK5mYAAEr/lkAAWlWuAABvM2xAABfvIgAAABakwAAdFmgAAAAy3QA== Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:49:41 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 0170DAF08C x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(199002)(51704005)(189002)(76796001)(98676001)(59766001)(76576001)(69226001)(93516002)(81342001)(74662001)(76786001)(93136001)(77982001)(74706001)(47976001)(50986001)(49866001)(74876001)(77096001)(95416001)(97336001)(99396002)(97186001)(74316001)(87266001)(63696002)(90146001)(81542001)(66066001)(83322001)(56816005)(65816001)(85306002)(85852003)(56776001)(76482001)(74366001)(94316002)(80022001)(87936001)(54356001)(33646001)(47446002)(79102001)(46102001)(53806001)(31966008)(2656002)(95666003)(80976001)(47736001)(4396001)(81686001)(92566001)(81816001)(86362001)(54316002)(99286001)(74502001)(83072002)(51856001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB062;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:7E25E4CC.A8C0471A.4EDB61BA.C45A77E9.20095;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;A:1;MX:1;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s33Inq2E032426 > The discussion seems to indicate that setting the isIcon=true will get > you a return arrow with a solid arrow head. > > From the example, in the table, it appears that isIcon=false will get > you a return arrow with a solid arrow head. Yes, the table should say isIcon=true for reply example. Conrad DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396551112; bh=L+AEKD55CQizkV0+CtGD5Ug5szEeb2Wln4kiz+2tk18=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=m7pjyFAtMBVT11YVy++ns+ZAk+pThZmVBH4/djlHAdh0T/ACYk3FP/7jV/BiejBd4WEEBGkA1g0Z0NkZz9ehDGd0ucA1PFYoVTrz0mcpIM+9k9l7aIqYBYW+jk+3ZsNV0wqPK81+hqByAB6nCnmACfHZ893ITqlSyiNa5PGjwAc= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 823754.99448.bm@smtp108.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: ixne.AsVM1mecUvfWwITS3q8bEI8gOQC6HnCx1R0cLviUVl TpQZOMlhXJn.2IBHnlYzhyL6CHTMJEF2KQqYkdbiD2.Eqq_oXV3xfhX_YSvu lHPU3Y6UZD.By4m_jV87YRmwnWZ5sEGW.XQWv1Qf1Z3hpVwpvat8A6afmVR3 5D5vs5pgtNX4VPHN.9T6VGnoNI06c_fAfBA9mko6RJ_Fh9lsq5X9wvGvhvA. 3Or8NYQEggiX2cP2rwfFIzlaSOvBm3PZc76YP88JDGGGMLeXttccC4VtSzNH Nk2fz3blg8RmXyV.oPVIKjAMfengXv2k9yPswHzWXzLPR_i7cLNnLs34NhGn SJAv7i0dgFqTbRn1UH9HHcvY8.LDt3ArnZujAgKgVPhjDfGyyLy9dOAqHNwU 453.ozVcJ1zFZfDk3RNMyeidSsfTakWl4D2KMrPXx7_0n3o2xnaDWaz1ubu8 Tr1AusCyHbvcYq07UViW4W_mZSPXlefCu0wtaYSGyhMrdOO06dPIqRJ0ci3q y1mqWvc10i78pZ.NNQtzERLpi X-Yahoo-SMTP: BHehp.2swBCs4PqecFo6LCqjUcnFjw4- X-Rocket-Received: from mjchonolesHP (mjchonoles@71.225.93.40 with plain [63.250.193.228]) by smtp108.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 03 Apr 2014 11:51:52 -0700 PDT From: "Michael Chonoles" To: "'Bock, Conrad'" , Cc: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 14:51:39 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQIFWbqIvejvaWEuWz+bwqSlVqeMRgD9WLynAaIfKUwCL8/cggI22KJDAeKwshsCZGjT0QIj35pfANSGZHcB8b1k9ZoSbQHA X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Good, we're getting to an agreement Michael -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 2:50 PM To: Michael Chonoles; issues@omg.org Cc: 'Alan Moore' Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows > The discussion seems to indicate that setting the isIcon=true will get > you a return arrow with a solid arrow head. > > From the example, in the table, it appears that isIcon=false will get > you a return arrow with a solid arrow head. Yes, the table should say isIcon=true for reply example. Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "'Alan Moore'" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYAABK5mYAAEr/lkAAWlWuAABvM2xAABfvIgAAABakwAAdFmgAAAAy3QAAAGUmAAAAD7IA= Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:52:29 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 0170DAF08C x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(189002)(199002)(54356001)(74706001)(87936001)(81542001)(92566001)(77982001)(59766001)(63696002)(33646001)(66066001)(95666003)(81686001)(99396002)(83322001)(86362001)(53806001)(76786001)(76576001)(51856001)(74366001)(83072002)(47446002)(54316002)(47736001)(87266001)(80976001)(95416001)(76796001)(74662001)(81816001)(93516002)(31966008)(65816001)(558084003)(46102001)(50986001)(90146001)(98676001)(97186001)(4396001)(47976001)(49866001)(74876001)(85306002)(2656002)(97336001)(76482001)(56776001)(77096001)(56816005)(94316002)(93136001)(74316001)(74502001)(85852003)(69226001)(81342001)(79102001)(80022001)(99286001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB063;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:B09F5115.35F0C6C8.BAD84148.2633A0C1.2003C;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s33Iqnqg032608 > Good, we're getting to an agreement Now we just need to find someone to fix it. :) Conrad From: "Bock, Conrad" To: Alan Moore , Michael Chonoles , "issues@omg.org" CC: "Oystein.Haugen@sintef.no" Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Topic: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Thread-Index: Ac9M9AUUcmtfEpQ8SWm8O73xZ1AQVwA5JaYAABK5mYAAEr/lkAAWlWuAABvM2xAABfvIgAAABakwAAdFmgAAAAy3QAAAGUmAAAAD7IAAG8ggAAAJ3OKQ Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 12:51:39 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [129.6.32.106] x-forefront-prvs: 01713B2841 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(189002)(199002)(51704005)(87266001)(80976001)(76482001)(95416001)(87936001)(93136001)(54316002)(99286001)(76786001)(56816005)(92566001)(85306002)(74706001)(69226001)(94946001)(33646001)(95666003)(81816001)(83322001)(47736001)(51856001)(93516002)(85852003)(53806001)(46102001)(2656002)(74502001)(56776001)(20776003)(49866001)(4396001)(54356001)(76576001)(59766001)(31966008)(86362001)(77096001)(81542001)(47976001)(74316001)(97186001)(81342001)(66066001)(98676001)(80022001)(97336001)(77982001)(79102001)(83072002)(94316002)(65816001)(50986001)(47446002)(74662001)(63696002)(76796001)(74366001)(90146001)(99396002)(81686001)(74876001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR09MB061;H:BY2PR09MB062.namprd09.prod.outlook.com;FPR:BD66F50E.A8D70D05.3BFF6388.84E83671.2016A;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id s34CplbE018100 Alan, Sorry, I must have missed some email. > The thing that worries me is that Oystein was saying ' But, like many > other things in UML, I do not think the above interpretation is > mandatory because it would invalidate many existing UML 2 diagrams ' . Which interpretation? > If that is the case how does the user opt in to the new notational rule? Which new notational rule? > In SysML for example, a modeller can set the 'isControlFlowDashed' > property on the SysMLActivityDiagram stereotype to indicate whether to > use dashed lines for control flows. > > Is something similar required here? You mean to have a filled arrowhead for reply messages? Conrad DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396625302; bh=QbBdPAIeRXrnZWdnUqnpwOrxMbp4Vav3Xx7AVn8KRW8=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=G8zTllz0lSUKFfYf929mPAVLMKKHJM36d8ZZaGus+ATLd8/WimbDiQRW8Yu1wgShdXnzdUkR0g8eI5XC4HiyOW6phuraY5ETchYvUiMvX7T+r6WY0sZqO2IdCv+G1s7gHG1LdXBDw/fE6BL1kVjWUPXw2EGbmXoYpTNJSQrvxKE= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 946276.27220.bm@smtp224.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: 0SWJclEVM1k2ZjMx2xbjUAtpb4E5j0JzzyElKKGCfgMuK.y DTz6kfW1XtcwKQCmRceg6r6XULohAa7yXAbjsALpSpOfGjbgCBiySXztS0eN UIOarNdXQD8V3iGe7X7W.JZnRfm4Em7MwEEdlZLCPf1.nin3EdaPBUnth40r lSqiujs.5a1EUHwAg5CmvMP9F69PYbSigSWkEMV9dWlP7pntZGYyuUkCrUfh tGQ4pIU.JCfGqe0LaoafO74fYa18u1yDriWjXYeVDtJbKNTzNq1Vf8jDPY4e OmD1yqDB052EA8N69PndNYfkth7QO_U6pFWLnrV2WQBCNIhc8h_Uuy_LrXg4 qSTY4y_XpFF9A8SvPn.bU_V9nigAGcuON._pUeR_vV0qaxTMJVe6qU.h1ZXy fXPcD_JapuAGRV_.NnInXvfC62d6xQL.9jX2iSWpRkKy8xPUvnuQ1xqGYHM5 QvEU85cQQUUA_RMl9ysBEQf1bVaiv3uYDQhVFFDH.0sXTgNcJYfD_0ilZycS eNVqmrKh07SfNTHFWrd4- X-Yahoo-SMTP: BHehp.2swBCs4PqecFo6LCqjUcnFjw4- X-Rocket-Received: from mjchonolesHP (mjchonoles@71.225.93.40 with plain [63.250.193.228]) by smtp224.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 04 Apr 2014 15:28:22 +0000 UTC From: "Michael Chonoles" To: "'Bock, Conrad'" , "'Alan Moore'" , Cc: Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 11:28:08 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQIFWbqIvejvaWEuWz+bwqSlVqeMRgD9WLynAaIfKUwCL8/cggI22KJDAeKwshsCZGjT0QIj35pfANSGZHcB8b1k9QLTFdqzAjstjcIBoafeygKdYlCFmclZNXA= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Sorry Conrad Oystein had previously proposed an interpretation where the return arrow head would match against the invocation arrow head -- allowing a return from an asych call. I had proposed an interpretation where the "final" return, the one ending the activation region would use the traditional notation, and any early returns would use the new notation. However, my understanding of this option, is that the specification does not discuss how/when it is to be chosen. So the notation choice couldn't really be used to covey an important semantic meaning, though it could be used as part of a stylistic convention. In other words, this could be set on a tool, user, diagram, or individual return basis -- as the tool vendor allows and the modeler prefers. Michael -----Original Message----- From: Bock, Conrad [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 8:52 AM To: Alan Moore; Michael Chonoles; issues@omg.org Cc: Oystein.Haugen@sintef.no Subject: RE: UML 2.5 Issue on DI for reply arrows Alan, Sorry, I must have missed some email. > The thing that worries me is that Oystein was saying ' But, like many > other things in UML, I do not think the above interpretation is > mandatory because it would invalidate many existing UML 2 diagrams ' . Which interpretation? > If that is the case how does the user opt in to the new notational rule? Which new notational rule? > In SysML for example, a modeller can set the 'isControlFlowDashed' > property on the SysMLActivityDiagram stereotype to indicate whether to > use dashed lines for control flows. > > Is something similar required here? You mean to have a filled arrowhead for reply messages? Conrad