Issue 4995: engineering model” introduced on page 34 (uml-scheduling-ftf)
Source: Commissariat a l Energie Atomique-CEA (Dr. Sebastien Gerard, sebastien.gerard(at)cea.fr)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: In a first correction, I have mentioned I disagree with the proposed terms of “engineering model” introduced on page 34 in order to define the layer which is more technology-specific. In his reply Bran Selic answers me it was because of the RM-ODP terminology mandated by the OMG. But even if this term is conserved, we could at least put an asterisk explaining it. Because, according to my mind, people who build the logical model are also engineers, I prefer to use terms like: “operational”, “execution”, … instead of “engineering”.

Resolution: See issue 4990 for disposition
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
March 19, 2002: received issue
June 30, 2003: closed issue
Discussion: 
I will put in an extra explanation of this (Bran)

End of Annotations:=====
This is issue # 4995

engineering 

In a first correction, I have mentioned I disagree with the proposed
terms of logy mandated by the OMG. But even if this term is conserved,
we could at least put an asterisk explaining it. Because, according to
my mind, people who build the logical model are also engineers, I
prefer to use terms like: instead of model