SYSML2_ — Description and examples for message notation are wrong

The description of message declarations in 7.13.6 Flow Connection Usages and Messages is incorrect. It states that a message declaration "may or may not include identification of source and target related features. If they are included, then they follow the payload specification (if any), with the source related feature identified after the keyword from, followed by the target related feature after the keyword to." However, the from and to features of a message are not the related features of the message as a flow connection usage. Rather, they are the values of the sourceEvent and targetEvent parameters of the MessageConnection (see parsing in 8.2.2.13.4 Message and Flow Connections and semantics in 8.4.9.6 Flow Connection Usages).

In light of this, the message declaration example in 7.13.6 is also incorrect, as is the textual notation for the first "Message" example in Table 11 Connections – Representative Notation (showing a message between ports). However, the graphical notation in this example seems to be acceptable, as are both the graphical and textual notations in the second "Message" example (showing a message on a sequence diagram).

Correct message examples

1. The approved resolution to SYSML2_-173 already corrects the description of messages formerly in 7.13.6 (now in 17.6.2).
2. The graphical notation for the first "Message" example in Table 11 (prior to SYSML2_-173) showed a message between ports on two parts. This is problematic, since this means the ports are acting as the message source and target events in the part, which is probably not what is intended. Rather, it makes more sense for the message to be between the parts themselves, basically making the first "Message" example largely just a different graphical notation for the same situation as shown in the second "Message" example.
3. 7.25.2 Use Case Definitions and Usages (formerly 7.24.2) also contains an example with messages declarations that need to be corrected.