Issue 4446: Ambiguous semantics of classifier ownerscope (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: NIST (Dr. Conrad Bock, conrad.bock(at)nist.gov) Nature: Revision Severity: Minor Summary: The semantics of classifier ownerscope is ambiguous for structural features declared on classifiers that have children. It is not defined whether this gives value for the classifier and all its descendents, or values for the classifier and each descendant separately. Resolution: see above Revised Text: Actions taken: August 3, 2001: received issue March 9, 2005: closed issue Discussion: Ownerscope is no longer in UML 2.0 so the issue does not apply. End of Annotations:===== Reply-To: From: "Conrad Bock" To: Cc: "Cris Kobryn" Subject: UML 1.5 issues Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 08:57:48 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UIDL: Q?+e9Oe%!!h^(!!~DRd9 Juergen, Here are my issues for UML 1.5. These are submitted as comments on the UML 1.4 as specified in ad/2001-02-13. Thanks, Conrad 1) Ambiguous semantics of classifier ownerscope The semantics of classifier ownerscope is ambiguous for structural features declared on classifiers that have children. It is not defined whether this gives value for the classifier and all its descendents, or values for the classifier and each descendant separately. Nature: Revision Reply-To: From: "Conrad Bock" To: Cc: Subject: RE: Reminder to vote on Ballot 6 (closes Wednesday noon EST!) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 14:59:42 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal Bran, NIST votes yes on all of ballot 6, except for 4446 (Ambiguous semantics of classifier ownerscope), on which it votes No. Issue 4446 points out an ambiguity with the UML 1.x ownerScope semantics, which is called isStatic in UML 2. The same problem applies, even though the name has changed. Would be good if the cleanup issues took account of the fact that some 1.x terms are renamed in 2.0, and treated the issue accordingly. Conrad User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.4.030702.0 Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 16:23:16 -0500 Subject: Re: Reminder to vote on Ballot 6 (closes Wednesday noon EST!) From: James Odell To: CC: Bran, Kabira votes yes on all of ballot 6, except for 4446 (Ambiguous semantics of classifier ownerscope), on which it votes No. Issue 4446 points out an ambiguity with the UML 1.x ownerScope semantics, which is called isStatic in UML 2. The same problem applies, even though the name has changed. Kabira agrees with NIST that it would be good if the cleanup issues took account of the fact that some 1.x terms are renamed in 2.0, and treated the issue accordingly. -Jim Subject: RE: Resubmission of 4446 Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 22:47:58 -0500 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Resubmission of 4446 Thread-Index: AcPvSO8lIVznr0ZXQYCXPnjL2AeQwwAPrv/Q From: "Pete Rivett" To: , Cc: X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id i1A3aVAu001073 Not a shared issue methinks - isStatic is added in Superstructure. Another example of why we need to distinguish what is added by Kernel compared to what is used as-is from Infra. Regards Pete Pete Rivett (mailto:pete.rivett@adaptive.com) Consulting Architect, Adaptive Inc. Dean Park House, 8-10 Dean Park Crescent, Bournemouth, BH1 1HL, UK Tel: +44 (0)1202 449419 Fax: +44 (0)1202 449448 http://www.adaptive.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Conrad Bock [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 2:07 PM > To: uml2-superstructure-ftf@omg.org > Cc: mu2i-ftf@omg.org > Subject: Resubmission of 4446 > > > Hi Juergen, > > Here is a restatement of issue 4446 with UML 2 terminology, > that should > be logged as a new issue. It is shared between infra and super. > > Conrad > > > Name: Conrad Bock > Company: NIST > mailFrom: conrad.bock@nist.gov > Nature: Revision > Severity: Minor > Subject: Ambiguous semantics of isStatic > > The semantics of isStatic = true is ambiguous for > structural features > declared on classifiers that have children. It is not > defined whether > this gives a single value for the classifier and all its > descendents, > or values for the classifier and each descendant separately. Reply-To: Joaquin Miller X-Sender: jm-acm.no@sbcglobal.net@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 08:36:23 -0800 To: UML Superstructure FTF From: Joaquin Miller Subject: no votes X-Change Technologies votes no on these issues on Ballot 6: 2541: We will change our vote if the resolution is changed to specify that 'OCL 2.' is to be used to designate that OCL is the language used, where is replaced to complete the name of the OCL version used. 4446: We will change our vote if the resolution is changed to specify the effect of isStatic. X-Change Technologies votes yes on the other issues on Ballot 6. PGP Fingerprint: CA23 6BCA ACAB 6006 E3C3 0E79 2122 94B4 E5FD 42C3 From: "Thomas Weigert" To: "Joaquin Miller" , "UML Superstructure FTF" Subject: RE: no votes Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:49:58 +0100 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MailScanner-Information: This message has been scanned for viruses/spam. Contact postmaster@uio.no if you have questions about this scanning X-UiO-MailScanner: No virus found X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=0, required 12) Conrad has already submitted a new issue replacing 4446, so we might as well close 4446. As written it does not apply any more, and we now have a new issue dealing with isStatic.... Th. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joaquin Miller [mailto:joaquin.no.spam@acm.org] > Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:36 PM > To: UML Superstructure FTF > Subject: no votes > > > 4446: We will change our vote if the resolution is changed to > specify the Cc: UML Superstructure FTF , cris.kobryn@telelogic.com From: Michael Latta Subject: More no votes on Ballot 6 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:41:22 -0800 To: Joaquin Miller X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) Ceira Technologies votes NO on the issues 2541 and 4446 for the reasons stated by X-Change Technologies and YES on all other issues in Ballot 6. We would like to see the resolution for 2541 include stated names for all OCL versions 1.x and 2.x. This is to allow legacy models to be imported into 2.x UML tools while retaining the accurate version of the OCL text being imported. It would be allowable to have tools that understand OCL auto-reformat the text, but tools that do not parse the OCL should leave the source version intact. The use of "OCL" without a version could be allowed as indicating a string asserted by the user to be OCL but not validated against one of the explicit versions. Michael Latta On Feb 10, 2004, at 8:36 AM, Joaquin Miller wrote: X-Change Technologies votes no on these issues on Ballot 6: 2541: We will change our vote if the resolution is changed to specify that 'OCL 2.' is to be used to designate that OCL is the language used, where is replaced to complete the name of the OCL version used. 4446: We will change our vote if the resolution is changed to specify the effect of isStatic. X-Change Technologies votes yes on the other issues on Ballot 6. PGP Fingerprint: CA23 6BCA ACAB 6006 E3C3 0E79 2122 94B4 E5FD 42C3 vi issue6018 Severity: Medium