Issue 7624: Name without a colon for Property in Composite Structures (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: Deere & Company (Mr. Roger Burkhart, burkhartrogerm(at)johndeere.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: In Composite Structures, under 9.3.12 Property, the following paragraph under "Presentation Options" under "Notation" is inconsistent with the rest of UML in creating a special interpretation of a missing notation element: "A property symbol may be shown containing just a single name (without the colon) in its name string. This implies the definition of an anonymously named class nested within the namespace of the containing class. The part has this anonymous class as its type. Every occurrence of an anonymous class is different from any other occurrence. The anonymously defined class has the properties specified with the part symbol. It is allowed to show compartments defining attributes and operations of the anonymously named class." The simple omission of notation elements is part of the option in virtually all UML diagrams to elide elements that aren't relevant or are defined and shown on other diagram views. Implying something to be created by the *absence* of an element breaks from user expectations. In this case, the most natural expectation of a simple name on a property box, without any colon, is that the string is just the name of the part or property, and that the type for the name, ordinarily shown using a ":Type" string, has been omitted from the diagram. The simplest way to resolve this issue is just to remove this paragraph from the specification. The specification would then revert to the default interpretation of a missing notation element, which is just that it isn't shown on a particular diagram view, not that it doesn't exist. The application of Composite Structure diagrams to systems engineering, in response to the UML for Systems Engineering RFP, expects to use all the flexibility that UML provides to include or not include diagram elements on particular views of a complex system, to avoid cluttering the many partial views that might be needed. Resolution of this issue is essential to avoid having a different rule for a name without a colon in standard UML vs. its application to systems engineering. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: August 6, 2004: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== ubject: UML 2.0 Superstructure FTF issue Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:51:55 -0500 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: UML 2.0 Superstructure FTF issue Thread-Index: AcR71a4XWpksH0hfRyuq0v6UUkSTBw== From: "Burkhart Roger M" To: issues@omg.org X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2004 16:51:55.0406 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE333AE0:01C47BD5] X-WSS-ID: 6D0D68A1100987-01-01 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id i76H3Mlj024573 Issue: Name without a colon for Property in Composite Structures In Composite Structures, under 9.3.12 Property, the following paragraph under "Presentation Options" under "Notation" is inconsistent with the rest of UML in creating a special interpretation of a missing notation element: "A property symbol may be shown containing just a single name (without the colon) in its name string. This implies the definition of an anonymously named class nested within the namespace of the containing class. The part has this anonymous class as its type. Every occurrence of an anonymous class is different from any other occurrence. The anonymously defined class has the properties specified with the part symbol. It is allowed to show compartments defining attributes and operations of the anonymously named class." The simple omission of notation elements is part of the option in virtually all UML diagrams to elide elements that aren't relevant or are defined and shown on other diagram views. Implying something to be created by the *absence* of an element breaks from user expectations. In this case, the most natural expectation of a simple name on a property box, without any colon, is that the string is just the name of the part or property, and that the type for the name, ordinarily shown using a ":Type" string, has been omitted from the diagram. The simplest way to resolve this issue is just to remove this paragraph from the specification. The specification would then revert to the default interpretation of a missing notation element, which is just that it isn't shown on a particular diagram view, not that it doesn't exist. The application of Composite Structure diagrams to systems engineering, in response to the UML for Systems Engineering RFP, expects to use all the flexibility that UML provides to include or not include diagram elements on particular views of a complex system, to avoid cluttering the many partial views that might be needed. Resolution of this issue is essential to avoid having a different rule for a name without a colon in standard UML vs. its application to systems engineering.