UAF 1.3 RTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

UAF13 — UAF or ISO 42010 Terms Do Not Form Correspondence Rules

  • Key: UAF13-32
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Eclectica Systems Ltd ( Nic Plum)
  • Summary:

    'Further, The UAF conforms to terms defined in the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 standard for architecture description, where the terms .... form correspondence rules specified as constraints on UAF.'

    This is incorrect. Terms / definitions cannot form correpondence rules.

    It isn't obvious whether there are any correpondence rules in the UAF given that it is the definition of the individual AF that defines the rules for the content of any particular view - the UAF just provides the "kit of parts" to enable the user to create them. If the UAF does itself define its own correspondence rules this would need to specified separately and somehow deal with potential inconsistencies wrt what does conformance etc then mean.

  • Reported: UAF 1.1 — Fri, 8 Apr 2022 09:22 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 18:38 GMT