Issue 6080: EventOccurrence, multiplicities incorrect in metamodel diagram (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: Simula Research Laboratory (Mr. Bran Selic, selic(at)acm.org) Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor Summary: The metamodel shown in Figure 328, p. 407 presents the associations from EventOccurrence to ExecutionOccurrence with multiplicity ‘*’. This should be [0..1] as given in the text. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: August 28, 2003: received issue March 9, 2005: closed issue Discussion: This issue was addressed as part of the resolution to issue 6224. Note that the solution there was to retain the 0..* multiplicity, because it is possible that a given event can cause multiple execution occurrences. So, the recommendation in this issue is rejected. Disposition: Closed, no change End of Annotations:===== From: webmaster@omg.org Date: 28 Aug 2003 02:48:02 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Oystein Haugen Company: Ericsson mailFrom: oystein.haugen@ericsson.com Notification: Yes Specification: UML 2.0 Superstructure Section: 14.2 FormalNumber: ptc/03-08-02 Version: 2.0 RevisionDate: August 2003 Page: 407 Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0) Description EventOccurrence, multiplicities incorrect in metamodel diagram The metamodel shown in Figure 328, p. 407 presents the associations from EventOccurrence to ExecutionOccurrence with multiplicity Þ±*Þ². This should be [0..1] as given in the text. Originally reported by Bran Selic, IBM. To: "Nikolai Mansurov" Cc: uml2-superstructure-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: More interaction issue resolutions from Nick X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.2CF1 June 9, 2003 From: Branislav Selic Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 19:43:46 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D25ML05/25/M/IBM(Release 6.0.2CF1|June 9, 2003) at 02/16/2004 19:43:50, Serialize complete at 02/16/2004 19:43:50 Thanks a lot, Nick. I have a problem with the proposed resolution to 6080: I think that the text is wrong and that the diagram is right. An EventOccurrence can have more than one associated execution occurrence. I pointed out in my previous e-mail that the monolithic execution occurrence block in case of an ALT fragment a set of execution occurrences, one for each alternative. In general, each of these will have a different finish event occurrence. Bran "Nikolai Mansurov" 02/16/2004 05:37 PM To: Branislav Selic/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA, cc: Subject: More interaction issue resolutions from Nick Hi Bran, Please find attached 5 resolutions for Interactions issues: 6278 (I have included Jim's comments that summarize the last week's discussion) 6084 minor edit 6260 duplicate 6019 duplicate (previously assigned to to Eran Gery) 6080 minor edit (previously assigned to Chris Armstrong) Eran, Chris, please note, that I'm starting to close some of the issues previously assigned to you. Please check that you agree with the resolutions (that are really trivial, and result only 5 minutes of time each ...). Bran, I have closed 6260 and 6019 as the result of our discussion on issue 6077. I think, it makes sense to do this consolidation for the sake of consistency of changes. I have also raised an issue of including more illustrations of the new graphical symbols. Please check that the text for 6077 includes a description of MessageKind and MessageSort as asked in 6019. Best regards, Nick #### mansurov_Interaction issues resolution 2.doc has been removed from this note on February 16, 2004 by Branislav Selic OMG Issue No: 6080 Title: EventOccurrence, multiplicities incorrect in metamodel diagram Source: International Business Machines (Mr. Bran Selic, bselic@ca.ibm.com) Summary: The metamodel shown in Figure 328, p. 407 presents the associations from EventOccurrence to ExecutionOccurrence with multiplicity .*.. This should be [0..1] as given in the text. Discussion: This issue was addressed as part of the resolution to issue 6224. Note that the solution there was to retain the 0..* multiplicity, because it is possible that a given event can cause multiple execution occurrences. So, the recommendation in this issue is rejected. Disposition: Closed, no change