Legacy Issue Number: 16869
Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Edward Barkmeyer)
The UML packages in the supporting UML document (bmi/2011-08-01.mdzip) are not consistently aligned with the sections of the specification. In particular:
Sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the specification are both in the TimeInfrastructure package, but section 8.3 is not.
Section 8.3 of the specification matches the Situations package, except that 8.3.7 Schedules is in a separate Schedules package. And the Situations package also contains the Tense concepts from 10.3.
Sections 9.1 to 9.4 of the specification are all in the TimeScales package, but sections 9.5 and 9.6 are not.
Section 9.5 of the specification matches the Calendars package, except that Gregorian calendar (9.5.5) is a separate UML package, and Internet Time (9.5.7) is a separate UML Package.
Section 9.6 of the specification (Time Tables) is in the Schedules package, along with the Schedules concepts from 8.3.7.
Section 10 of the specification matches the Indexicals package, except that Tense and Aspect (10.3) is in the UML Situations package. (The UML model treats tense as a relationship of situations to time, but the time concepts involved are indexical.)
Section 11 of the specification matches the DurationValues package, except that month values (11.6) and year values (11.5) are in the UML Gregorian calendar package.
Section 12 of the specification matches the UML TimeCoordinates Package, except that Section 12.4 is in the Gregorian calendar package.
Annex D of the specification matches the UML Packages: Sequences (D.1), Quantities (D.2), Mereology (D.4), except that D.3 Scales is included in the UML Quantities package.
In sum, some reorganization of the specification did not result in a consistent reorganization of the UML model. In general, the UML packaging should be made consistent with the text. But, if the Gregorian calendar package is intended to be separable, then Gregorian elements in other parts of the specification may need to be treated as exceptions. In addition, one can argue that the 'time table' and 'schedule' concepts are closely related and should be together in the specification.
I do not recommend the use of nested UML Packages. It complicates the UML model and all references to the UML concepts defined in it.
Reported: DTV 1.0b1 — Thu, 1 Dec 2011 05:00 GMT
Disposition: Resolved — DTV 1.0
The FTF decided to reorganize the document itself, and then repackage the UML model to match the new document organization. The goals of this reorganization are:
To modularize the document, the vocabulary, and the UML model so that users do not need to accept the entire design in order to adopt parts.
To reconcile dependencies among the parts of the specification, so that each concept is introduced before any dependencies upon that concept.
To create an individual SBVR vocabulary and UML package matching the content of each top-level Clause of the specification.
To clearly show the dependencies among the Clauses, and correspondingly among the SBVR vocabularies and UML packages.
To separate the generic time and calendar concepts from the definitions of the Gregorian, week, time of day, and Internet calendars so that users can model other calendars using the generic concepts without dependencies on these calendars.
See the new text for clause 6.3 (below) for a summary of the new organization.
The definition of ‘nominal time unit’ is updated to resolve a forward dependency from ‘nominal time unit’ to ‘duration value sets’.
Updated: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:51 GMT
DTV_ — UML packages don't match specification sections
- Key: DTV_-18
- OMG Task Force: Date-Time (DTV) 1.0 FTF 2