Issue 7442: Components (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: Cutter Information (Mr. Oliver Sims, osims(at)simsassociates.co.uk) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant Summary: The Components chapter of the UML2 Superstructure spec does not specify what component generalization/specialization means. Is it intended that this be left unspecified? If not, then I propose the semantics described in a paper I wrote on this subject prior to the spec being adopted. The paper suggested an approach that is consistent with substitutability semantics, and should also be able to be made to work with most if not all component technologies. I'd be happy to email the paper to anyone interested. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: June 3, 2004: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 03 Jun 2004 20:12:17 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Oliver Sims Company: Open-IT Limited mailFrom: oliver@open-it.co.uk Notification: Yes Specification: UML2 Superstructure Section: Components FormalNumber: ptc/03-08-02 Version: 1 RevisionDate: 08/00/2003 Page: 133 Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.40209) Description The Components chapter of the UML2 Superstructure spec does not specify what component generalization/specialization means. Is it intended that this be left unspecified? If not, then I propose the semantics described in a paper I wrote on this subject prior to the spec being adopted. The paper suggested an approach that is consistent with substitutability semantics, and should also be able to be made to work with most if not all component technologies. I'd be happy to email the paper to anyone interested.