BACM 1.0b2 FTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

BACM — Use of "leg" terminology to describe relationships

Open Closed All
  • Key: BACM-32
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( James Rhyne)
  • Summary:

    It’s not clear why the “leg” construct is introduced when association classes already exist in UML and have properties instead of legs. As do n-ary associations. Though neither are part of MOF officially, I don’t see the justification of the “leg” terminology.
  • Reported: BACM 1.0a1 — Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:32 GMT
  • Updated: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 00:47 GMT