EAI — The "languageElement" association vs. the "message" association for EAIPara

Document: UML Profile and Interchange Models for EAI
Section: 6.3.4 (EAIMessageContent)

Description:
EAIParameter inherits a "languageElement" association with TDLangElement from FCMParameter (this association is part of the FCM specification and is shown in Figure 6-1). However, this association does seem not related in any way to the "message" association with EAIMessageContent. Indeed, an EAIMessageContent may be made up of several TDLangElements, so it is not clear which one of them might be considered to be "the" TDLangElement for the EAIParameter. This makes it unclear how the semantics of EAIParameter can be specialized from the FCM semantics for FCMParameter.

Recommendation:
Perhaps one could require that the languageElement for an EAIParameter to be, say, the languageElement of the body of the EAIMessagePart. But I don't think this really quite captures the right semantics (and, besides, this body is actually optional).

Instead, what is probably required is a change to the FCM to break the unfortunate cyclic dependency between the FCM (in the EDOC specification) and the CAM (in this specification). For instance, the FCM could define an abstract type descriptor class for the use as the type of an FCMParameter. TDLangElement could then be one possible descendant of this abstract type descriptor. But, for the purposes of EAIParameter, EAIMessageElement should also be a descendant, with the constraint that the type of an EAIParameter is always an EAIMessageElement (and the additional "message" association then being unnecessary).

see below