Issue 6170: InstanceSpecification (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: SSA (Mr. Arthur Culbertson, nobody) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Notation The first paragraph indicates that both the instance name and the classifier can be omitted from an instance specification. This informal description leads open the possibility of specifying just the colon with neither the instance name nor the classifier. Is this what is intended? BNF should be used to clarify. Resolution: This is a more detailed version of Issue 6160. Revised Text: Actions taken: September 3, 2003: received issue December 2, 2004: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== From: "Culbertson, Arthur" To: "'issues@omg.org'" , "'uml2-superstructure-ftf@omg.org'" Subject: UML 2.0 Superstructure Issues (Part I -Structure) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 10:43:47 -0400 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2654.52) Dear Sirs: The following are some potential issues that I have found while reviewing Part I - Structure portion of the UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification (document pct/03-08-02) dated August 2003. As some of these issues could impact performance on the UML certification exams, I would appreciate feedback as soon as possible. Thanks, Art Culbertson 3) 7.7.1 InstanceSpecification Notation The first paragraph indicates that both the instance name and the classifier can be omitted from an instance specification. This informal description leads open the possibility of specifying just the colon with neither the instance name nor the classifier. Is this what is intended? BNF should be used to clarify. OMG Issue No: 6170 Title: InstanceSpecification Source: Lockheed Martin (Mr. Arthur Culbertson, arthur.culbertson@ssa.gov) Summary: Notation The first paragraph indicates that both the instance name and the classifier can be omitted from an instance specification. This informal description leads open the possibility of specifying just the colon with neither the instance name nor the classifier. Is this what is intended? BNF should be used to clarify. Discussion: Proposed Resolution This issue is redundant with 6160. The same resolution is proposed, namely: Add the constraint that not both Classifier and Name may be omitted. If an InstanceSpecification is anonymous, a Classifier shall be identified for it, by means of which features can be identified for slots. Disposition: Pending OMG Issue No: 6170 Title: InstanceSpecification Source: Lockheed Martin (Mr. Arthur Culbertson, arthur.culbertson@ssa.gov) Summary: Notation The first paragraph indicates that both the instance name and the classifier can be omitted from an instance specification. This informal description leads open the possibility of specifying just the colon with neither the instance name nor the classifier. Is this what is intended? BNF should be used to clarify. Discussion: Proposed Resolution This issue is redundant with 6160. The resolution is the same. Disposition: PendingDuplicate Issue 6170: InstanceSpecification Source: Lockheed Martin (Mr. Arthur Culbertson, arthur.culbertson@ssa.gov) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Notation The first paragraph indicates that both the instance name and the classifier can be omitted from an instance specification. This informal description leads open the possibility of specifying just the colon with neither the instance name nor the classifier. Is this what is intended? BNF should be used to clarify. Discussion: This is a more detailed version of Issue 6160. Resolution: Duplicate Revised Text: Actions taken: September 3, 2003: received issue