Issue 7552: Actions need to be independent from Activities (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: XTG, LLC (Mr. Joaquin Miller, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: If we take Activity as fundamental, and consider that we can't specify something that happens with Action alone, shouldn't we remove the first sentence of the second paragraph of 11 Actions : 11.1 Overview : Basic Concepts: "An action is the fundamental unit of behavior specification." Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: June 10, 2004: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Reply-To: Joaquin Miller X-Sender: jm-omg@sbcglobal.net@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:26:24 -0700 To: UML Superstructure FTF From: Joaquin Miller Subject: RE: ,ac, ,av, Actions need to be independent from Activities--another message If we take Activity as fundamental, and consider that we can't specify something that happens with Action alone, shouldn't we remove the first sentence of the second paragraph of 11 Actions : 11.1 Overview : Basic Concepts: "An action is the fundamental unit of behavior specification." Cordially, Joaquin p.s. if anyone agrees, i will submit this as a (sadly, past the deadline) issue. From: "Thomas Weigert" To: "Joaquin Miller" , "UML Superstructure FTF" Subject: RE: ,ac, ,av, Actions need to be independent from Activities--another message Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:43:35 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Joaquin, I agree with your conclusion, but I do not agree with the premise. Activities are NOT the fundamental behavioral descriptions. They are one way of describing behavior where you can describe behavior as characterized by a token flow model. Th. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joaquin Miller [mailto:jm-omg@sbcglobal.net] > Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 9:26 AM > To: UML Superstructure FTF > Subject: RE: ,ac, ,av, Actions need to be independent from > Activities--another message > > > If we take Activity as fundamental, and consider that we can't specify > something that happens with Action alone, shouldn't we remove the first > sentence of the second paragraph of 11 Actions : 11.1 Overview : Basic > Concepts: > > "An action is the fundamental unit of behavior specification." > > Cordially, > > Joaquin > > > > p.s. if anyone agrees, i will submit this as a (sadly, past the > deadline) > issue. > > Reply-To: Joaquin Miller X-Sender: jm-omg@sbcglobal.net@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:15:01 -0700 To: UML Superstructure FTF From: Joaquin Miller Subject: RE: ,ac, ,av, Actions need to be independent from Activities--another message Thanks, Thomas. Thomas wrote: Joaquin, I agree with your conclusion, but I do not agree with the premise. Activities are NOT the fundamental behavioral descriptions. They are one way of describing behavior where you can describe behavior as characterized by a token flow model. That's the question. (I'm not too happy with the premise, myself, but that's quite beside the point of my message below.) So: If Action is not the fundamental unit of behavior specification, and Activity is not the fundamental unit of behavior specification, then it must be the case that either: Some other model element is the fundamental unit of behavior specification. or In UML there is no fundamental unit of behavior specification. Cordially, Joaquin -----Original Message----- From: Joaquin Miller [mailto:jm-omg@sbcglobal.net] If we take Activity as fundamental, and consider that we can't specify something that happens with Action alone, shouldn't we remove the first sentence of the second paragraph of 11 Actions : 11.1 Overview : Basic Concepts: "An action is the fundamental unit of behavior specification."