SYSML17 — Conform as a Generalization is Incorrect - A View is Not a Viewpoint / 'is a' Does Not Equate to Conform

A Conform relationship is a generalization between a view and a viewpoint.

This is semantically incorrect. Assuming that viewpoint is being used in ISO 42010 sense (no stated anywhere within the specification so this is an error if true as the common use of 'viewpoint' is not the same as that in the standard) - a viewpoint is a specification against which a view is prepared (and interpreted). A view is not a viewpoint. What's has effectively been said is that a design that conforms to a requirement document is a requirement document.

In the reverse sense if I want to define that an oak (tree) is an oak I wouldn't then state an Oak (tree) conforms to a Tree.

If you need to state the conformance relationship between view and viewpoint SysML provides somewhere a 'satisfy' stereotype.

The history of the OMG misrepresenting or misunderstanding what a 42010::viewpoint is in their documents over the years is woeful.