Issue 8090: Section: 7.3.10 (uml2-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
Summary: If constraind elements are those elements required to evaluate the constraint spedividation, why is the multiplicity for the specification: ValueSpecification[0..1]? Shouldn't the multiplicity be 1? If not, please clarify.

Resolution: see above
Revised Text: Superstructure (ptc/04-10-02)
Change the “specification” entry on page 57 from:
specification: ValueSpecification[0..1]
to:
specification: ValueSpecification[1]
Infrastructure (ptc/04-10-14)
Change the “specification” entry on page 52 from:
specification: ValueSpecification[0..1]
to:
specification: ValueSpecification[1]
Actions taken:
January 18, 2005: received issue
August 23, 2006: closed issue
Discussion: 
Indeed. The metamodel actually shows the multiplicity correctly.
End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org 
Date: 18 Jan 2005 15:25:54 -0500 
To: <issues@omg.org> 
Subject: Issue/Bug Report 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name: Jane Messenger
Company: U. S. Geological Survey
mailFrom: jmessenger@usgs.gov
Notification: Yes
Specification: Superstructure
Section: 7.3.10
FormalNumber: ptc/04-10-02
Version: 2.0 Draft Adopted
RevisionDate: 10/08/2004
Page: 57
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Q312461)
Description
If constraind elements are those elements required to evaluate the constraint spedividation, why is the multiplicity for the specification: ValueSpecification[0..1]? Shouldn't the multiplicity be 1? If not, please clarify.