-
Key: OCL231-11
-
Legacy Issue Number: 16129
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Fujitsu ( Tom Rutt)
-
Summary:
There are same element names in both OCL and UML. Those are confusing. I wonder whether those are UML elements or OCL elements. Besides, it seems there is no clear distinction between UML/OCL (upper case letter) term and general term (lower case letter), since these are used in mixture.
- It is confusing to distinguish OCL “Constraint” from UML “Constraint” in the text. Furthermore, there are some “constraint” s (in a lower case letter). The lower case letter/upper case letters for “constraint” are mixed.
OCL “Constraint” should be distinguishable from UML “Constrain”.
- It is confusing to distinguish OCL “Constraint” from UML “Constraint” in the text. Furthermore, there are some “constraint” s (in a lower case letter). The lower case letter/upper case letters for “constraint” are mixed.
-
Reported: OCL 2.3 — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 04:00 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — OCL 2.3.1
-
Disposition Summary:
Not much of a title.
There are many element names that are the reused in UML; presumably class names were meant. I think that these are all distinct and not confusing to me. No convincing example is given. The example of a Constraint is where UML and OCL overlap so it is obviously the same class.
Spelling is separately raised as Issue 16126 so there is no need to address it here as well.
Disposition: Closed, no change -
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT
OCL231 — Issue nnnn: Japan PAS Ballot Comment 6 (ocl2-rtf)
- Key: OCL231-11
- OMG Task Force: OCL 2.4 RTF