SPMSSR — Clarification needed on multiplicity of formalisms

It is not clear initially how or if a formalism can refer to multiple sub-formalisms. While the model allows for it, the text does not make this explicit. Suggestion to add explanatory text to section 10.1.

Clarify that a FormalizedDefinition can be composed of other FormalizedDefinitions

Recommend to replace Section 10.1 Paragraph 3 from:
Because we desire multiple definitions of a pattern for a variety of use cases, many instances of FormalizedDefinition can be referenced by a single PatternDefinition. Each of these FormalizedDefinitions, in turn, can be composed using an extremely lightweight boolean logic mechanism defined here, to allow the composition of model fragments from a number of modeling domains. This satisfies our need for a single pattern formal definition requiring multiple views to properly describe the pattern. Many patterns, for instance, have both unique structural forms and run-time behaviors. It is unlikely that a single OMG model is going to capture all the nuances of each, but a combination of ASTM and OCL models, for instance, or PHORML and KDM, may be sufficient. For this reason, SPMS defines a minimalist composition mechanism for those that wish to have a lightweight yet compliant composition model. For more complex needs, an OCL expression may be used by an instance of DefinitionTerminal referencing an OCL model. This Formalisms package is shown in Figure 5.
With:
Because we desire multiple definitions of a pattern for a variety of use cases, many instances of FormalizedDefinition can be referenced by a single PatternDefinition. Each of these FormalizedDefinitions, in turn, can be composed of further instances of FormalizedDefinitions as sub-models, by using an extremely lightweight boolean logic mechanism defined here. This allows the composition of model fragments from a number of modeling domains into a comprehensive whole. This satisfies our need for a single pattern formal definition requiring multiple views to properly describe the pattern. Many patterns, for instance, have both unique structural forms and run-time behaviors. It is unlikely that a single OMG model is going to capture all the nuances of each, but a combination of ASTM and OCL models, for instance, or PHORML and KDM, may be sufficient. For this reason, SPMS defines a minimalist composition mechanism for those that wish to have a lightweight yet compliant composition model. For more complex needs, an OCL expression may be used by an instance of DefinitionTerminal referencing an OCL model. This Formalisms package is shown in Figure 5.