Issue 8319: Section: 13.3.29 (uml2-rtf) Source: (, ) Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor Summary: To be consistent with other multiplicities in fig. 318, add the association multiplicity to the figure. Mention that the association redefines value as shown in the figure. I am not familiar with BNF notation but should "<timeobservation>" be spelled "<timeObservation>?" Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: February 26, 2000: received issue February 22, 2005: received issue August 23, 2006: closed issue Discussion: Most of this issue was resolved in the resolution to 8318. The capitalization of a BNF entry is a matter of taste – no need to change it. Disposition: Closed, no change End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 22 Feb 2005 17:00:06 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Jane Messenger Company: U. S. Geological Survey mailFrom: jmessenger@usgs.gov Notification: Yes Specification: Superstructure Section: 13.3.29 FormalNumber: ptc/04-10-02 Version: 2.0 Draft Adopted RevisionDate: 10/08/2004 Page: 493-494 Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Q312461) Description To be consistent with other multiplicities in fig. 318, add the association multiplicity to the figure. Mention that the association redefines value as shown in the figure. I am not familiar with BNF notation but should "" be spelled "?" Issue 8319: Section: 13.3.29 Issue summary To be consistent with other multiplicities in fig. 318, add the association multiplicity to the figure. Mention that the association redefines value as shown in the figure. I am not familiar with BNF notation but should [illegible, ed.] Discussion Most of this issue was resolved in the resolution to 8318. The capitalization of a BNF entry is a matter of taste . no need to change it. -- BranSelic - 28 Jul 2005 Revised Test Resolution Closed no change RtfIssue1000000083 (27 Jul 2005 - 17:10 - r1.4 - ConradBock)