-
Key: UAF14-161
-
Status: open
-
Source: Eclectica Systems Ltd ( Nic Plum)
-
Summary:
9.1.5 Domain Metamodel::Services - ServiceRole , Figure 9:215 - ServiceRole
'A behavioral feature of a Service whose behaviour is specified in a ServiceFunction'
a Role is something that is played by typically an Actor. i.e. the relationship is something like Service plays ServiceRole (if the metamodel names are accurate).
Instead what is shown is:-
1) a role name of 'type' on Service - Service is a type of ServiceRole?
2) whole:part relationship - ServiceRole is a part of Service - it shouldn't be a whole:part if a role is played by the element
3) How does anyone in a non-UML or even UML ADL implement this view specification - the only 3 green relationship elements provided are ServiceMessage from/to ServiceRole, ServiceConnector from/to ServiceRole, the other end of PerformsInContext isn't shown. There are many possibilities (OperationalRole, OperationalActivityAction, FunctionAction, ResourceRole, ServiceFunctionAction, ServiceRole) - Figure 9:107 - which one or ones are permitted for this view specification? This is a problem in not presenting whole triples i.e. there should be no case where both the from and to node elements aren't also shown.
4) role names on ServiceMessage should be on ServiceRole not the ServiceMessage connector element
5) The definition of ServiceRole is not atomic and hence incorrect - in depends on the existence of a relationship with a ServiceFunction element hence is not independent and defines a triple. -
Reported: UAF 1.2 — Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:52 GMT
-
Updated: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 14:57 GMT
UAF14 — ServiceRole is Neither a Type of Nor Part of a Service
- Key: UAF14-161
- OMG Task Force: Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) 1.4 RTF