Issue 6348: Control pins (uml2-superstructure-ftf)
Source:  (Dr. Guus Ramackers, Guus.Ramackers(at)gmail.com)
Nature: Revision
Severity: Significant
Summary: There should be a special kind of pin for control tokens.  This will
allow parameter sets to be used with control, for example.  Also
resolves issue of where control is bufferred when it is direceted at a
join.  Can be implemented as a pin that has no parameter, by making them
the last in the ordering of pins, so no parameter corresponds to them.
This is also a request of the SysML team.

Resolution: see above
Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
October 20, 2003: received issue
March 8, 2005: closed issue
Discussion: 
Using control with parameter sets requires a user-level type for control, which
could be used with parameters. Since UML does not standardize a user-level
model library, the resolution below allows it to be indicated on ObjectNode. To
address the other half of the issue requires that pins be marked as control for the
action, rather than data.
Figure 187 of the FAS, ObjectNode, add the attribute
isControlType : Boolean = false
In ObjectNode class:
Description, second paragraph:
Remove “and”.
At end of sentence, add “, and carrying control values.”
Attributes (CompleteActivities) add entry:
isControlType : Boolean = false Tells whether the type of the
object node is to be treated as control.
Semantics (CompleteActivities), add new paragraph at end:
An object node may indicate that its type is to be treated as a
control value, even if no type is specified for the node. Control
edges may be used with the object node having control type.
Notation    Under Figure 275 of the FAS, paragraph beginning
"(CompleteActivities)", third sentence, replace "and ordering" with ",
ordering, and control type".
After Figure 187, add new figure with caption:
Control pins
In Pin class,
Change title of "Attributes" section to "Attributes (CompleteActivities)", and
add new entry:
isControl : Boolean = false Tells whether the pins provides data to
the actions, or just controls when it executes it.
Add new section "Constraints (CompleteActivities), with new constraint:
[1] Control pins have a control type.
isControl implies isControlType
Semantics, add new paragraph at end:
"(CompleteActivities) Control pins always have a control type, so
they can be used with control edges. Control pins are ignored in
the constraints that actions place on pins, including matching to
behavior parameters for actions that invoke behaviors. Tokens
arriving at control input pins have the same semantics as control
arriving at an action, except that control tokens can queue up in
control pins. Tokens are placed on control output pins according to
the same semantics as tokens placed on control edges coming out
of actions."
Notation
Just before the last sentence of the section, in its own paragraph,
add "(CompleteActivities) Control pins are shown with a text
annotation placed near the pin symbol {control}.". In ControlFlow class, Constraints, change first constraint to:
[1] Control flows may not have object nodes at either end,
except for object nodes with control type.
End of Annotations:=====
me: Guus Ramackers
Company: Oracle
mailFrom: guus.ramackers@oracle.com
Nature:  Revision
Severity: Significant
Subject: Control pins


There should be a special kind of pin for control tokens.  This will
allow parameter sets to be used with control, for example.  Also
resolves issue of where control is bufferred when it is direceted at a
join.  Can be implemented as a pin that has no parameter, by making them
the last in the ordering of pins, so no parameter corresponds to them.
This is also a request of the SysML team.