Issue 8666: Section: 11.9.3 & 11.9.4 (ocl2-rtf) Source: U. S. Geological Survey (Ms. Jane Messenger, jmessenger(at)usgs.gov) Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor Summary: Typo - pg 151 change "The standard iterator expression" to "The standard iterator expressions." The reject expression for both Bag and Sequence have "source->select(iterator | not body) on the left side of the equals symbol. Shouldn't the word "iterate" be used instead of "select?" The sortedBy expression is very restrictive if the sort order must always have the lowest value first. A statement that a sort order could be by a > value would be nice. Resolution: The typo is actually for Set. The wording for reject is correct; reject is defined as select with a not body. The sortedBy issue is a repeat of Issue 8665, which remains unresolved. (Maybe we need a sort(i, j | body) iteration so that body can return pairwise comparison which could be in reverse order.) Revised Text: In 11.9.2 Set replace The standard iterator expression by The standard iterator expressions Actions taken: March 30, 2005: received issue December 23, 2013: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 30 Mar 2005 11:36:59 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Jane Messenger Company: U. S. Geological Survey mailFrom: jmessenger@usgs.gov Notification: Yes Specification: UML 2.0 OCL Specification Section: 11.9.3 & 11.9.4 FormalNumber: ptc/03-10-14 Version: Adopted Specification RevisionDate: 10/14/2003 Page: 151-153 Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; Q312461) Description Typo - pg 151 change "The standard iterator expression" to "The standard iterator expressions." The reject expression for both Bag and Sequence have "source->select(iterator | not body) on the left side of the equals symbol. Shouldn't the word "iterate" be used instead of "select?" The sortedBy expression is very restrictive if the sort order must always have the lowest value first. A statement that a sort order could be by a > value would be nice.