OCL21 — Issue: Unspecified syntax and semantics for Integer, Real, and String

Description: The specification does not describes the syntax of integer, real or string literals. Also, it does not contain the description of the allowed set of values.
Rationale: Specifying the syntax and the semantics of basic types will increase the portability of OCL programs. In order to describe the semantics of basic types, the specification should describe the set of values, the allowed operations, and the standard used to perform the allowed operations. I think that it will be also useful to allow different types of integers and reals, like Integer(16), Integer(32), Integer(64), Real(32), and Real(64), in order to optimize the computational process.

OCL 2.3 introduced concrete syntax specifications for integer, real or string literals.
In regard to specific sets of values, the issue seems to indicate a misunderstanding of OCL; OCL is a specification language that may be evaluated. Integers and Reals are unlimited. If a particular implementation chooses to use a restricted value set, then it is for that implementation to prove that its reduced range is appropriate.
Users can of course define their own DataTypes with whatever characteristics they find suitable.
Disposition: Closed, no change