Issue 6071: Conditional Node and Loop Node notation missing (uml2-rtf) Source: CA Technologies (Mr. Andrew John Haigh, andrew.haigh(at)ca.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Significant Summary: In 03-07-06 there was notation for conditional nodes and loop nodes for activities. These are missing in 03-08-02. Makes taking the certification difficult Resolution: Disposition: Deferred to UML 2.4 RTF Revised Text: Actions taken: August 21, 2003: received issue Discussion: Due to lack of time, the RTF/FTF agrees that the following are problems that need fixing, but decided to defer their resolution to a future RTF working on this specification. End of Annotations:===== Subject: Issues for UML 2.0 Superstructure Finalization Task Force Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 08:56:42 -0400 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Issues for UML 2.0 Superstructure Finalization Task Force Thread-Index: AcNn48ubYUpzm7mHQ82WkW4M0t+iZA== From: "Haigh, Andrew J" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Aug 2003 12:56:43.0691 (UTC) FILETIME=[ABF827B0:01C367E3] X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id h7LCuWe4023673 Source: Computer Associates (Andrew Haigh, andrew.haigh@ca.com) I am using 03-08-02 Title: Conditional Node and Loop Node notation missing Severity: High Summary: In 03-07-06 there was notation for conditional nodes and loop nodes for activities. These are missing in 03-08-02. Makes taking the certification difficult OMG Issue No: 6071 Title: Conditional Node and Loop Node notation missing (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: Computer Associates (Mr. Andrew John Haigh, andrew.haigh@ca.com) Summary: In 03-07-06 there was notation for conditional nodes and loop nodes for activities. These are missing in 03-08-02. Makes taking the certification difficult Discussion: Document ptc/03-07-06: is a Draft Adopted Specification for UML 2.0 Superstructure, not the final. The version voted on for adoption was ad/030401; and ptc/03-08-02 is the UML 2.0 Superstructure Final Adopted specification. Disposition: Closed, no change Reply-To: From: "Conrad Bock" To: "uml2ftf" Subject: RE: Activity and Powertype issues for next ballot Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:34:19 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal Jim, et al, For 6071 (Conditional Node and Loop Node notation missing), I'd rather defer or resolve, since so many people ask for it. One resolution, if the FTF wants, is to reconsider the proposal from the U2P drafts. It is attached, for those who haven't seen it. Conrad conditionalnode-loopnode.pdf From: "Thomas Weigert" To: , "uml2ftf" Subject: RE: Activity and Powertype issues for next ballot Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:20:04 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal As we have already discussed in the U2P ad nauseum, this notation is not good. Just try some examples, and you will see that it does not explain an algorithm very well. The original examples that Jim did with the FFT in the action semantics were better in that respect, but would not combine well with the activity format. Until there is a notation that really works it is better not to have a notation, lest a bad notation sticks. From my own experience in standardization, it is virtually impossible to change surface syntax once a standard has been in use. All the best, Th. > -----Original Message----- > From: Conrad Bock [mailto:conrad.bock@nist.gov] > Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 2:34 PM > To: uml2ftf > Subject: RE: Activity and Powertype issues for next ballot > > > > Jim, et al, > > For 6071 (Conditional Node and Loop Node notation > missing), I'd rather defer or resolve, since so many > people ask for it. > > One resolution, if the FTF wants, is to reconsider the > proposal from the U2P drafts. It is attached, for those > who haven't seen it. > > Conrad OMG Issue No: 6071 Title: Conditional Node and Loop Node notation missing Source: Computer Associates (Mr. Andrew John Haigh, andrew.haigh@ca.com) Summary: In 03-07-06 there was notation for conditional nodes and loop nodes for activities. These are missing in 03-08-02. Makes taking the certification difficult Discussion: The notation in the draft U2P submission was intentionally removed in the final one. It is too much of a change for the FTF to resolve. Disposition: Defer