-
Key: KERML_-45
-
Status: open
-
Source: NIST ( Mr. Conrad Bock)
-
Summary:
When redefining features, some metaproperties must be respecified even when they're intended to be the same as the redefined ones, while others don't. For example, feature type and multiplicity do not need to be respecified on a redefining feature when they are intended to be the same as the redefined feature, as I understand it, while direction does, even when it is intended to be the same as the redefined feature. Modelers must remember which feature metaproperties need to be respecified and which don't. The textual syntax would be easier to use if this were the same for all feature metaproperties, and more so if metaproperties could always be omitted in redefining features when they are intended to be the same as the redefined feature.
-
Reported: KerML 1.0b1 — Tue, 17 Oct 2023 19:02 GMT
-
Updated: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 23:30 GMT
KERML_ — Redefining features sometimes must respecify metaproperties even when they are the same as those of the redefined feature
- Key: KERML_-45
- OMG Task Force: Kernel Modeling Language (KerML) 1.0 FTF 2