-
Key: KERML-11
-
Status: open
-
Source: NIST ( Mr. Conrad Bock)
-
Summary:
Clause 8.4.4.7.2 (Steps, under Behavior Semantics) says
The checkStepSpecialization constraint requires that Steps specialize Performances::performances.
checkStepEnclosedPerformanceSpecialization and checkStepSubperformanceSpecialization constraints require that a Step whose owningType is a Behavior or another Step specialize Performances::Performance::enclosedPerformance or, if it is composite, Performances::Performance::subperformance.
checkStepOwnedPerformanceSpecialization constraint requires that a composite Step whose owningType is a Structure or a Feature typed by a Structure specialize Objects::Object::ownedPerformance.
where enclosedPerformances, subperformances, and ownedPerformances (in)directly subset timeEnclosedOccurrences, the values of which happen during the occurrences "having" the value.
The first constraint leaves open the possibility that steps might not happen during the occurrences they are steps of, bc Performances::performances is a step and subsets occurrences, rather than timeEnclosedOccurrences. This conflicts with the normal meaning of the term "step" (a terminology issue), which typically connotes (in library terms) performances that happen during the occurrences they are steps of.
The second constraint prevents the possibility above for steps owned by behaviors or other steps, while the third only prevents it for composite steps owned by structures.
The step keyword looks like it's sometimes used with other intentions than the constraints indicate. For example, in Observation.kerml:
behavior ObserveChange { ... step transfer : TransferBefore[1] ... { /* Then send changeSignal to changeObserver. */ ... } ... }
↑ Is it intended that observechange occurrences timeenclose the entire transfer (all the way to it's arrival at its target), as required by the second constraint?
struct ChangeMonitor { ... step startObservation { ... } step cancelObservation { ... }
↑ Is it intended that the values of start/CancelObservation can happen at other times than the ChangeMonitor occurrence referencing them, as allowed by the third constraint?
Transfers:: step transfers: Transfer[0..*] nonunique subsets performances, binaryLinks { ... } step messageTransfers: MessageTransfer[0..*] nonunique subsets transfers { ... } step flowTransfers: FlowTransfer[0..*] nonunique subsets transfers { ... } step transfersBefore: TransferBefore[0..*] nonunique subsets transfers, happensBeforeLinks { ... } step flowTransfersBefore: FlowTransferBefore[0..*] nonunique subsets flowTransfers, transfersBefore { ... }
↑ These are features of (effectively) Anything, including structures and behaviors, so sometimes they'll be time enclosed and sometimes not. For example:
Occurrence:: feature incomingTransfers: Transfers::Transfer[0..*] subsets Transfers::transfers { ... } feature outgoingTransfers: Transfers::Transfer[0..*] subsets Transfers::transfers { ... }
↑ will be time enclosed for transfers into/out of performances, but not objects, assuming the above are redefined as steps in behaviors or structures (or that features specialized from steps are also steps).
-
Reported: KerML 1.0a1 — Fri, 21 Apr 2023 15:22 GMT
-
Updated: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 23:30 GMT
KERML — Steps are not always time enclosed
- Key: KERML-11
- OMG Task Force: Kernel Modeling Language (KerML) 1.0 FTF