Issue 19640: A type defines a set member (not a set) (uml2-rtf) Source: Atos Origin S.p.A. (Mr. Graham Berrisford, nobody) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant Summary: CURRENT 1) A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. 2) Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. 3) However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type. COMMENTS 1) A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. Surely a type does not specify a set? Rather it specifies what it takes to one (any) member in the afore-mentioned set? It defines each individual in a collection of instances. Surely the sentence should be changed, perhaps along these lines? A Type specifies each value in the set of values known as instances of the Type. A Type specifies the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type. "A Type specifies features shared by things that are instances of the Type. "A Type specifies each member of a set by defining one or more characteristics shared by all the members of the set. "The set members are instances of the Type." 2) Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. So there are two kinds of Type? What are they are called? 3) However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type. Surely the definition of the type is tautologous? The Type *is* the definition the definition of the rules for what constitutes an instance. Surely should be changed thus? The rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the Type. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: October 14, 2014: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Oct 2014 17:18:54 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Graham Berrisford Employer: Avancier Ltd mailFrom: GrahamBerrisford@btinternet.com Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Modelling Language Section: 7.5.3 FormalNumber: Document Number: ptc/2013-09-05 Version: 2.5 Doc_Year: 2013 Doc_Month: September Doc_Day: Day Page: 26 Title: A type defines a set member (not a set) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Remote Name: host109-153-103-250.range109-153.btcentralplus.com Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko Time: 05:18 PM Description: CURRENT 1) “A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. 2) “Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. 3) “However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type.” COMMENTS 1) “A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. Surely a type does not specify a set? Rather it specifies what it takes to one (any) member in the afore-mentioned set? It defines each individual in a collection of instances. Surely the sentence should be changed, perhaps along these lines? “A Type specifies each value in the set of values known as instances of the Type.” “A Type specifies the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type.” "A Type specifies features shared by things that are instances of the Type.” "A Type specifies each member of a set by defining one or more characteristics shared by all the members of the set.” "The set members are instances of the Type." 2) “Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. So there are two kinds of Type? What are they are called? 3) “However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type.” Surely “the definition of the type” is tautologous? The Type *is* the definition ­ the definition of the rules for what constitutes an instance. Surely should be changed thus? “The rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the Type. X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A090203.543E8DF6.00AD,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0 X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=32/50,refid=2.7.2:2014.10.10.74220:17:32.629,ip=109.153.103.250,rules=__HAS_FROM, __PHISH_FROM2, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL_FROM, FROM_NAME_ONE_WORD, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __IN_REP_TO, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, INVALID_MSGID_NO_FQDN, __MSGID_32HEX, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CTYPE_MULTIPART_ALT, __CTYPE_HAS_BOUNDARY, __CTYPE_MULTIPART, __HAS_X_MAILER, __OUTLOOK_MUA_1, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC, __ANY_URI, LINK_TO_IMAGE, URI_ENDS_IN_HTML, __FRAUD_BODY_WEBMAIL, __FRAUD_CONTACT_NUM, __STOCK_PHRASE_24, __FRAUD_CONTACT_NAME, __HIGHBITS, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, __C230066_P5, __CP_NOT_1, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, __HTML_FONT_BLUE, __HAS_HTML, BODY_SIZE_10000_PLUS, BODYTEXTH_SIZE_10000_LESS, __MIME_HTML, __IMGSPAM_BODY, __TAG_EXISTS_HTML, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, __URI_NS, SXL_IP_DYNAMIC[250.103.153.109.fur], RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, __PHISH_FROM, __OUTLOOK_MUA, RDNS_SUSP, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL, FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, IMGSPAM_BODY X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=btcpcloud; t=1413385719; bh=TEfqpiQ5xcuejNPznINV9S+5hPEOlIhW5tzk2GA/udk=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:X-Mailer; b=MnD0hk5x9DqZ2VPrS46aCiWC13v8t/GD3SM0fe1hQD2GUoN1BszY36/KL/ypHUrxB9scfppd2ItnRI1aMPuepv168NXNKbi2VTMyDTURDBmCM7vxL/4TO6q3ylA+2J7PY7uLjN0L5GIBAfi+Hnf8a2TLfBWYgjqsYJLJwhPR3Ts= From: "graham" To: "'Juergen Boldt'" Subject: RE: Issue/Bug Report Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:08:29 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Ac/ofd6W3D2UG9ssS9+tt8bVBU/RjwACtp0g X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org  Thanks Juergen I am not sure I phrased it well enough. I'd welcome a clarification discussion with any interested task force member. For me - I think - A set (e.g. of planets) is a collection - the set can have attributes of its own (e.g. average mass or density). A type (e.g. planet) is not a collection - it is a description that fits each and every member of a set/collection. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Juergen Boldt [mailto:juergen@omg.org] Sent: 15 October 2014 14:42 To: GrahamBerrisford@btinternet.com Subject: Re: Issue/Bug Report Hi Graham, I assigned to the UML 2.6 Revision Task Force Best regards, -Juergen At 05:18 PM 10/14/2014, you wrote: ******************************************************************************* Name: Graham Berrisford Employer: Avancier Ltd mailFrom: GrahamBerrisford@btinternet.com Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Modelling Language Section: 7.5.3 FormalNumber: Document Number: ptc/2013-09-05 Version: 2.5 Doc_Year: 2013 Doc_Month: September Doc_Day: Day Page: 26 Title: A type defines a set member (not a set) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Remote Name: host109-153-103-250.range109-153.btcentralplus.com Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko Time: 05:18 PM Description: CURRENT 1) �A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. 2) �Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. 3) �However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type.� COMMENTS 1) �A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. Surely a type does not specify a set? Rather it specifies what it takes to one (any) member in the afore-mentioned set? It defines each individual in a collection of instances. Surely the sentence should be changed, perhaps along these lines? �A Type specifies each value in the set of values known as instances of the Type.� �A Type specifies the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type.� "A Type specifies features shared by things that are instances of the Type.� "A Type specifies each member of a set by defining one or more characteristics shared by all the members of the set.� "The set members are instances of the Type." 2) �Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. So there are two kinds of Type? What are they are called? 3) �However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type.� Surely �the definition of the type� is tautologous? The Type *is* the definition � the definition of the rules for what constitutes an instance. Surely should be changed thus? �The rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the Type. Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services 109 Highland Ave Needham, MA 02494 USA Tel: +1 (781) 444 0404 x 132 fax: +1 (781) 444 0320 www.omg.org [] From: Ed Seidewitz To: Juergen Boldt CC: "issues@omg.org" , "uml2-rtf@omg.org" Subject: Re: issue 19640 -- UML 2.5 RTF issue Thread-Topic: issue 19640 -- UML 2.5 RTF issue Thread-Index: AQHP6H2eggNOmL1R1ECgy1fs5vUODZwxYHcr Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:54:45 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-Mailprotector-Decision: deliver X-Mailprotector-Connection: TLSv1|cas203.mailprotector.com|54.208.113.85|CAS203.mailprotector.local|0.0|0.0|0|||0|0|0|0 X-Mailprotector-Results: clean X-Mailprotector-Score: 0 X-Mailprotector-IP-Analysis: 0, 54.208.113.85, Ugly c=0 p=0 Source New X-Mailprotector-Scan-Diagnostics: 0-0-0-15229-c X-Mailprotector-ID: 66930a89-425f-4f6a-a671-863bb8d1b677 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Surely one should not use "surely" to mean "in my opinion"... Sent from my iPhone On Oct 15, 2014, at 3:40 PM, Juergen Boldt wrote: From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Oct 2014 17:18:54 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Graham Berrisford Employer: Avancier Ltd mailFrom: GrahamBerrisford@btinternet.com Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: Unified Modelling Language Section: 7.5.3 FormalNumber: Document Number: ptc/2013-09-05 Version: 2.5 Doc_Year: 2013 Doc_Month: September Doc_Day: Day Page: 26 Title: A type defines a set member (not a set) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Remote Name: host109-153-103-250.range109-153.btcentralplus.com Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko Time: 05:18 PM Description: CURRENT 1) �A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. 2) �Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. 3) �However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type.� COMMENTS 1) �A Type specifies a set of allowed values known as the instances of the Type. Surely a type does not specify a set? Rather it specifies what it takes to one (any) member in the afore-mentioned set? It defines each individual in a collection of instances. Surely the sentence should be changed, perhaps along these lines? �A Type specifies each value in the set of values known as instances of the Type.� �A Type specifies the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type.� "A Type specifies features shared by things that are instances of the Type.� "A Type specifies each member of a set by defining one or more characteristics shared by all the members of the set.� "The set members are instances of the Type." 2) �Depending on the kind of Type, instances of the Type may be created or destroyed over time. So there are two kinds of Type? What are they are called? 3) �However, the rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the definition of that Type.� Surely �the definition of the type� is tautologous? The Type *is* the definition � the definition of the rules for what constitutes an instance. Surely should be changed thus? �The rules for what constitutes an instance of the Type remain fixed by the Type. Juergen Boldt Director, Member Services 109 Highland Ave Needham, MA 02494 USA Tel: +1 (781) 444 0404 x 132 fax: +1 (781) 444 0320 www.omg.org []