Issue 5992: There appears to be a typo on page 2-148, in section 2.12.2.13 on StubState (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: Honeywell (Mr. Steve Hickman, steve.hickman(at)honeywell.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: There appears to be a typo on page 2-148, in section 2.12.2.13 on StubStates. In this section it states that StubState is a child of State. However, in Figure 2-24 on page 2-141 it shows StubState as derived from StateVertex Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: July 8, 2003: received issue March 9, 2005: closed issue Discussion: Stubstates are no longer exist in UML 2.0, therefore, this issue is obsolete in the UML2.0 context. Disposition: Closed, no change End of Annotations:===== X-Sender: linda@amethyst.omg.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 07:36:45 -0400 To: juergen Boldt From: Linda Heaton Subject: Fwd: OMG Document formal/03-03-01 Hi, Could you please make this an issue? Thanks, L From: "Hickman, Steve (MN65)" To: "'linda@omg.org'" Subject: OMG Document formal/03-03-01 Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 16:33:53 -0500 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) There appears to be a typo on page 2-148, in section 2.12.2.13 on StubStates. In this section it states that StubState is a child of State. However, in Figure 2-24 on page 2-141 it shows StubState as derived from StateVertex. One of these must be incorrect. Steve Hickman Principal Research Scientist Mail Stop MN65-2600 Technology Solutions Lab Honeywell Technology Center Steve.Hickman@honeywell.com 3660 Technology Drive 612-951-7651 Minneapolis, MN 55418 OMG Issue 5992 Title: There appears to be a typo on page 2-148, in section 2.12.2.13 on StubState Source: Honeywell (Mr. Steven Hickman, steve.hickman@honeywell.com) Summary: There appears to be a typo on page 2-148, in section 2.12.2.13 on StubStates. In this section it states that StubState is a child of State. However, in Figure 2-24 on page 2-141 it shows StubState as derived from StateVertex Discussion: Stubstates are no longer exist in UML 2.0, therefore, this issue is obsolete in the UML2.0 context. Disposition: closed, No change (resolved in UML2.0)