Issue 8310: Section: 13.3.17 (uml2-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
Summary: Figure 318 shows the association specification:Interfal[1] that redefines specification. Add this to sub-section Associations in the concept since the concept is not as specialized
Resolution: This has already been resolved in UML 2.2.
Revised Text:
None.
Disposition:	Closed No Change

Revised Text: 
Actions taken:
February 22, 2005: received issue
April 26, 2010: closed issue
April 26, 2010: closed issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====

m: webmaster@omg.org 
Date: 22 Feb 2005 14:31:38 -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: 13.3.17
FormalNumber: ptc/04-10-02
Version: 2.0 Draft Adopted
RevisionDate: 10/08/2004
Page: 481
Nature: Clarification
Severity: Minor
HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Q312461)
Description
Figure 318 shows the association specification:Interfal[1] that redefines specification. Add this to sub-section Associations in the concept since the concept is not as specialized.



Issue 8310: Section: 13.3.17 


Issue summary 
Figure 318 shows the association specification:Interfal[1] that redefines specification. Add this to sub-section Associations in the concept since the concept is not as specialized 


Discussion 
The associations from Interval Constraint? and its subclasses named "specification" is not documented. Should this construct be removed? 
-- ThomasWeigert 18 May 2005 


Usually the metamodel overrides omissions in the text, but if it's completely missing, we'd hafto to find out what the authors intended, which no one ever saw! 

-- ConradBock - 03 Jun 2005 


Revised Test 


Resolution