UAF 1.3b1 RTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

UAF13 — Standards Taxonomy Missing conformsTo Element?

  • Key: UAF13-119
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Eclectica Systems Ltd ( Nic Plum)
  • Summary:

    On figure 8:79 Standards Taxonomy we appear to have something like UAFElement conformsTo Standard. It is unclear because 'conformsTo' appears to be a role (which is incorrect if so), the multiplicity should be 0..* not *.

    What provides the 'conformsTo' relationship required?

    Relationships on the diagram aren't named. The multiplicities aren't correct - they should never be * (1 is always permissible). 'ratifiedBy' role is naming a relationship - as the target element is Organization the role name ought to be 'ratifyingOrganization' i.e. characterising the target node.

    There appears to be no conformsTo UAF element. The relationship on the diagram isn't named. The other fly in the ointment is that someone has copied SysML for the Requirements diagram which does show a 'Satisfy' relationship. So 'Satisfy' vs 'conformsTo'? This is one of the problems in not separating implementation from the DMM (the DMM shouldn't simply repeat the names of SysML, UML etc elements since there's no reason that they represent the same thing and you need the ability to diconnect as this is supposed to be ADL agnostic.

    How is this view specification supposed to be implemented when relationships aren't labelled and there appear to be elements missing?

  • Reported: UAF 1.2b1 — Thu, 4 Apr 2024 13:50 GMT
  • Updated: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:19 GMT