Issue 8967: UML SuperStructure - Inconsistency re State Machine terms (uml2-rtf) Source: (, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: think there is some inconsistency in your usage of terms in chapter 15 State Machines. It isn't really clear (I think) what you mean sometimes when you use the terms "state machine" "behavioral state machines" and "protocol state machines". In my (humble) opinion you should never use only the term "state machine" when you do not mean both "behavioral state machine" and "protocol state machine". 15.3.12 is a perfect example where I think there is confusion, or at least lack of clarity, since you talk about "state machines" executing "activities". Clearly(?), not all state machines do-- more precisely--protocol state machines don't. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: August 16, 2005: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== iler: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 09:55:01 -0400 To: Juergen Boldt From: Anders Thelemyr (by way of Linda Heaton ) Subject: UML SuperStructure - Inconsistency re State Machine terms Is this an issue??? Hi, [Hope I'm sending this to the right instance] I think there is some inconsistency in your usage of terms in chapter 15 State Machines. It isn't really clear (I think) what you mean sometimes when you use the terms "state machine" "behavioral state machines" and "protocol state machines". In my (humble) opinion you should never use only the term "state machine" when you do not mean both "behavioral state machine" and "protocol state machine". 15.3.12 is a perfect example where I think there is confusion, or at least lack of clarity, since you talk about "state machines" executing "activities". Clearly(?), not all state machines do-- more precisely--protocol state machines don't. I am in no way an expert or authority in this area, but I _am_ trying to get an increasingly clearer picture of UML (2.0). Looking forward to your comments to the above! Best Regards Anders Thelemyr