Legacy Issue Number: 3783
Source: XTG, LLC ( Joaquin Miller)
This is a request for an interpretation of UML 1.3.
The question is: Is there a UML 1.3 model element that represents the concept of an interface on an object?
-------- Background -------
Evidently the way to get an interpretation of the meaning of an OMG specification is this: "If you file the interpretation request as an issue against the relevant FTF/RTF then the resolution will be your interpretation."
The UML submission said:
"... An interface is only a collection of operations with a name; it cannot be directly instantiated. Instantiable classifiers, such as class or use case, ..."
"UML objects are not modeled as presenting interfaces. A UML interface is not instantiable, so there is not a UML model element that corresponds directly to the interface of an OMG object."
UML 1.3 says:
"... An interface is only a collection of operations with a name. It cannot be directly instantiated. Instantiable classifiers, such as class or use case, ..."
In UML 1.3, there are Instance and Link, which stand for instances of Classifier and Association. Instance includes DataValue, NodeInstance, ComponentInstance, Object, and LinkObject. SubsystemInstance has been proposed for UML 1.4. There is not any model element that is a subtype of Instance and corresponds to Interface. (That is, the association, classifier, of Instance and Classifier does not associate any model element with Interface.)
[It is clear that a UML model may include an object that is an instance of a class that realizes an interface.]
I am hoping this is easy to interpret and can be resolved quickly.
Reported: UML 1.3 — Tue, 15 Aug 2000 04:00 GMT
Disposition: Resolved — UML 1.4.2
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT