Issue 8029: underlined association name (uml2-rtf) Source: NIST (Dr. Conrad Bock, conrad.bock(at)nist.gov) Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant Summary: underlined association name Figures 120 and 121 underline the association names, which doesn't seem consistent with the notation for instances in Figure 21. Resolution: The notation for instance specification seems clear that if an association name is shown on an instance specification, that this name would be underlined, see p.84: “It is not necessary to show an underlined name where it is clear from its connection to instance specifications that it represents a link and not an association.” (The diagram example in that section does not show the name.) Therefore, the above two figures are consistent with the notation defined for instance specifications. One could eliminate the association name, if so desired. Revised Text: Disposition: Closed, no change Revised Text: Actions taken: December 30, 2004: received issue October 27, 2008: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 30 Dec 2004 15:26:38 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Conrad Bock Company: NIST mailFrom: conrad.bock@nist.gov Notification: No Specification: UML 2 Super Section: Composite FormalNumber: ptc/04-10-02 Version: 2.0 RevisionDate: 04-10-02 Page: - Nature: Clarification Severity: Significant HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) Description underlined association name Figures 120 and 121 underline the association names, which doesn't seem consistent with the notation for instances in Figure 21. Issue 8029: underlined association name Issue summary underlined association name Figures 120 and 121 underline the association names, which doesn't seem consistent with the notation for instances in Figure 21. Discussion The issue is incorrect in that there is no such inconsistency. In fact, the text for Instance Specification?, section 7.3.22, clearly states that the links deriving from associations could be labeled by underlined names (albeit these names may be omitted if no confusion can arise). -- ThomasWeigert Section 7.3.22 actually says: "It is not necessary to show an underlined name where it is clear from its connection to instance specifications that it represents a link and not an association." and uses this convention in Figure 52. It's more consistent and easier to read than the underlining in Figures 120 and 121. -- ConradBock - 25 May 2005 Revised Test Resolution