Issue 6451: UML 2 Super / Dependency / ownership of dependencies (uml2-rtf) Source: Simula Research Laboratory (Mr. Bran Selic, selic(at)acm.org) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: At present, a dependency is not owned by any other element except a package. It seems to make sense for a dependency to be owned by its source. For example, the client of a usage should own it, since that would mean that the usage would be deleted along whenever its client is deleted -- it makes no sense to have a dependency independently of the depending (source) element. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: November 7, 2003: received issue August 23, 2006: closed issue Discussion: Unfortunately, this recommended fix would not solve the problem since more than one model element can be the source (client) of a Dependency. Since, in general, each source element is equal to all the others, there is no basis for singling out one of them to be the “owner”. Disposition: Closed, no change End of Annotations:===== ubject: UML 2 Super / Dependency / ownership of dependencies X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.2CF1 June 9, 2003 From: Branislav Selic Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 08:30:37 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D25ML05/25/M/IBM(Release 6.0.2CF1|June 9, 2003) at 11/07/2003 08:30:41, Serialize complete at 11/07/2003 08:30:41 At present, a dependency is not owned by any other element except a package. It seems to make sense for a dependency to be owned by its source. For example, the client of a usage should own it, since that would mean that the usage would be deleted along whenever its client is deleted -- it makes no sense to have a dependency independently of the depending (source) element. Bran Selic IBM Software Group -- Rational Software 770 Palladium Drive Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2V 1C8 ph. (613) 591-7915 fax (613) 599-3912 Subject: Another resolution for Ballot 21 Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:21:38 -0700 X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Another resolution for Ballot 21 Thread-Index: AcR0nhz4htITZ3OXRzyWb6OjvRMF0wAIE4zg From: "Karl Frank" To: "Branislav Selic" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jul 2004 16:21:46.0866 (UTC) FILETIME=[FA822D20:01C474BE] Please see attached. This is one we discussed on the FTF conference call, but as you will see, the proposed resolution that was then discussed is not possible, because our discussion forgot that Dependency is not binary. 6451 closed no change. - Karl 6451_for_ballot21.doc Issue 6451 on Classes Chapter OMG Issue No: 6451 1 OMG Issue No: 6451 Title: UML 2 Super / Dependency / ownership of dependencies Source: International Business Machines (Mr. Bran Selic, bselic@ca.ibm.com) Summary: At present, a dependency is not owned by any other element except a package. It seems to make sense for a dependency to be owned by its source. For example, the client of a usage should own it, since that would mean that the usage would be deleted along whenever its client is deleted -- it makes no sense to have a dependency independently of the depending (source) element. Discussion: This issue appears to make a good point, and the suggested resolution included in the issue looks reasonable, because of the unstated (but incorrect) assumption that dependency is a directed binary relationship. On the contrary, a single dependency may be from many model elements, which depend collectively on many others. This makes it impossible to adopt the proposed resolution, as there is no single client to own the dependency. Note the following description of Dependency from the current FAS Disposition: Closed, no change :wq e-mail: bselic@ca.ibm.com