Issue 9169: Mapping of subsetted properties do not need to change name of operation                                                                                                                                 (mof2idl-ftf)
Source: Fraunhofer FOKUS (Mr. Michael Soden, soden@ikv.de soden@fokus.fraunhofer.de)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: The mapping of subsetted properties does not have to change the name of the generated operations for this property. Only the implemented semantic should changed and reflect that of MOF2.0 Core.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: Resolution:
Modify the {isDerivedUnion=true} clause in  rule (17) on page 18.
It was changed to:
{isDerivedUnion = true} : if a property is a derived union, then the computational semantic of the operation is equivalent to the UML2 abstract semantic of unions (i.e., the returned set of instances depends on the subsets defined in subclasses).
{subsettedProperty->size() > 0} : defining a property as subset leads to the computational semantic of the get and set operations being equivalent to the UML2 abstract semantics. Note that this implies that the (sub-) set of instances for this property is included in the returned set of instances of an existing union-operation of superclasses for which this property is a subset.

Actions taken:
November 15, 2005: received issue
March 8, 2006: closed issue
Discussion: 

End of Annotations:=====
MG Issue No: [Temp22]
Title:	Mapping of subsetted properties do not need to change the name of the operations.
Source:
Michael Soden, soden@ikv.de	
Summary:
The mapping of subsetted properties does not have to change the name of the generated operations for this property. Only the implemented semantic should changed and reflect that of MOF2.0 Core.
 
Discussion:

Resolution:
Modify the {isDerivedUnion=true} clause in  rule (17) on page 18.
It was changed to:
{isDerivedUnion = true} : if a property is a derived union, then the computational semantic of the operation is equivalent to the UML2 abstract semantic of unions (i.e., the returned set of instances depends on the subsets defined in subclasses).
{subsettedProperty->size() > 0} : defining a property as subset leads to the computational semantic of the get and set operations being equivalent to the UML2 abstract semantics. Note that this implies that the (sub-) set of instances for this property is included in the returned set of instances of an existing union-operation of superclasses for which this property is a subset.

 
Disposition:	open