1. OMG Mailing List
  2. Diagram Definition 1.2 Revision Task Force

Open Issues

  • Issues not resolved
  • Name: dd-rtf
  • Issues Count: 6

Issues Descriptions

A_style_canvas Association is unnamed

  • Key: DD12-6
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Model Driven Solutions ( Ed Willink)
  • Summary:

    The final Association in DG.xmi

    <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Association" xmi:id="A_style_canvas" memberEnd="Canvas-packagedStyle A_style_canvas-canvas">
    <ownedEnd xmi:type="uml:Property" xmi:id="A_style_canvas-canvas" name="canvas" type="Canvas" association="A_style_canvas"/>
    </packagedElement>

    has no name. This is at best poor practice and contrary to the guidance at the end of UML 2.5 2.4.2.

  • Reported: DD 1.1 — Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:18 GMT
  • Updated: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 19:22 GMT

Why does A_style_canvas have no name?

  • Key: DD12-5
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Model Driven Solutions ( Ed Willink)
  • Summary:

    All the Associations in DC/DG/DI have names except just one:

    <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Association" xmi:id="A_style_canvas" memberEnd="Canvas-packagedStyle A_style_canvas-canvas">
    <ownedEnd xmi:type="uml:Property" xmi:id="A_style_canvas-canvas" name="canvas" type="Canvas" association="A_style_canvas"/>
    </packagedElement>

    Is this intended?

  • Reported: DD 1.1 — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 08:13 GMT
  • Updated: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 13:56 GMT

Small typos.

  • Key: DD12-1
  • Legacy Issue Number: 19486
  • Status: open  
  • Source: yahoo.fr ( Lambert Clara)
  • Summary:

    There are some typos in the attributes description of Color data type, we can read:
    "Integer [1] - the red component of the color in the range (0..255)"
    for all three components, green and blue included.

    The description should reflect the correct color.

  • Reported: DD 1.0 — Mon, 23 Jun 2014 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:40 GMT

Small typo.

  • Key: DD12-2
  • Legacy Issue Number: 19485
  • Status: open  
  • Source: yahoo.fr ( Lambert Clara)
  • Summary:

    There is a small typo in the DD specification document.
    On page 17 we can read:
    "namely the Diagram Graphics(DI) package (Clause 9) and the Diagram Interchange(DG) package"

    The acronyms in the parenthesis are reversed, it should be Diagram Graphics(DG) and Diagram Interchange(DI).

  • Reported: DD 1.0 — Mon, 23 Jun 2014 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:40 GMT

Constraints

  • Key: DD12-4
  • Legacy Issue Number: 16492
  • Status: open  
  • Source: NIST ( Conrad Bock)
  • Summary:

    The spec currently has no constraint sections. Should we add them? For
    example, we might require unowned diagram elements to be diagrams

  • Reported: DD 1.0b1 — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:40 GMT

Consider possibility of adding Port concept to DI

  • Key: DD12-3
  • Legacy Issue Number: 18680
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Fraunhofer FOKUS ( Max Bureck)
  • Summary:

    Hi, the concept of ports, attached to the outside bounds of an element allowing connections between elements is a widespread concept. Adding this concept would help generic layouting algorithms taking ports into account (such as KIELER) doing a much better job. Since DI defines abstract subclasses, meta models without ports can simply choose to not use the concept.

  • Reported: DD 1.0 — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:40 GMT