Issue 4267: MOF-RTF issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered (mof-rtf) Source: GoodData Corporation (Mr. Martin Matula, matulic(at)gmail.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The modelElement end of AttachesTo association should be ordered. It does make sense to have one tag attached to several model elements in a specified order. (E.g. tag decorating a set of class attributes which create a unique identifier of instances of this class) Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: April 11, 2001: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== From: Martin Matula To: "MOF-RTF (E-mail)" , "'issues@omg.org'" Subject: issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:26:48 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-2" X-UIDL: >I6!!(kLd9KZLe9EKB!! MOF-RTF issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered The modelElement end of AttachesTo association should be ordered. It does make sense to have one tag attached to several model elements in a specified order. (E.g. tag decorating a set of class attributes which create a unique identifier of instances of this class) Martin Matula (mailto:martin.matula@netbeans.com) tel: +420(2)3300-9153 Sun Micro: x49153 Praha, CR X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Martin Matula cc: "MOF-RTF (E-mail)" , crawley@dstc.edu.au Subject: Re: issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered In-Reply-To: Message from Martin Matula of "Wed, 11 Apr 2001 16:26:48 +0200." <10F82FC788E0D311AB820060083EAE1E02290B52@mail.netbeans.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 09:40:52 +1000 From: Stephen Crawley X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 1.0 (http://www.roaringpenguin.com/mimedefang/) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: E2=e9 MOF-RTF issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered > > The modelElement end of AttachesTo association should be ordered. It > does > make sense to have one tag attached to several model elements in a > specified > order. (E.g. tag decorating a set of class attributes which create a > unique > identifier of instances of this class) An Association cannot be ordered on both ends. The AttachesTo association is already ordered on the "tag" end. So the only way your suggestion can be made to work would be if we removed the ordering on "tag" and added it to "modelElement". I don't think this would be a good idea. It could impact on Tag usage, and because it would significantly change the Model IDL ... by removing operations from the AttachesTo interface. -- Steve X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: mof-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: Issue 4267: MOF-RTF issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:35:21 +1000 From: Stephen Crawley X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 1.0 (http://www.roaringpenguin.com/mimedefang/) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: )1O!!6%&e9jj,!!U,7e9 Folks, Here is my proposed resolution to this issue. -- Steve > Source: Sun Microsystems (Mr. Martin Matula, martin.matula@czech.sun.com) > Nature: Uncategorized Issue > Severity: > Summary: > The modelElement end of AttachesTo association should be ordered. It does > make sense to have one tag attached to several model elements in a > specified order. (E.g. tag decorating a set of class attributes which > create a unique identifier of instances of this class) Proposed Resolution: "Close this issue with no action and the following comment: Only one AssociationEnd of a MOF Association can be declared as ordered. Since the 'tag' end of 'AttachesTo' is already ordered, we cannot also make the 'modelElement' end ordered." Proposed Revised Text: NONE Importance: Normal Subject: Re: Issue 4267: MOF-RTF issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered To: Stephen Crawley Cc: mof-rtf@omg.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.4a July 24, 2000 Message-ID: From: "Stephen Brodsky" Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 13:15:22 -0700 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM039/03/M/IBM(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 10/10/2001 02:17:34 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: Tn$e9[(5e9"nKe9([1!! Steve, Make sense. Thanks, -Steve Stephen A. Brodsky, Ph.D. Software Architect, STSM Notes Address: Stephen Brodsky/Santa Teresa/IBM@IBMUS Internet Address: sbrodsky@us.ibm.com Phone: 408.463.5659 Stephen Crawley on 10/10/2001 07:35:21 AM To: mof-rtf@omg.org cc: Subject: Re: Issue 4267: MOF-RTF issue: AttachesTo.modelElement - ordered Folks, Here is my proposed resolution to this issue. -- Steve > Source: Sun Microsystems (Mr. Martin Matula, martin.matula@czech.sun.com) > Nature: Uncategorized Issue > Severity: > Summary: > The modelElement end of AttachesTo association should be ordered. It does > make sense to have one tag attached to several model elements in a > specified order. (E.g. tag decorating a set of class attributes which > create a unique identifier of instances of this class) Proposed Resolution: "Close this issue with no action and the following comment: Only one AssociationEnd of a MOF Association can be declared as ordered. Since the 'tag' end of 'AttachesTo' is already ordered, we cannot also make the 'modelElement' end ordered." Proposed Revised Text: NONE