Legacy Issue Number: 3999
the association between StructuralFeature and Classifier should be
removed. Attributes can not describe more information than
Associations/AssociationEnds can. Therefore it is obsolete and confuses
the user of UML, which to choose when modeling.
On page 3-40 in the UML 1.3 specification it says: "Note that an
attribute is semantically equivalent to a composition association;
however, the intent and usage is normally different."
If the semantics are equivalent, then it is impossible to distinguish
between them. There is no extra layer of meaning above the semantics
layer that can distinguish between two things with equal semantics.
Semantics is meaning. I think this sentence is contradictory. I have not
been able to find out what the difference in "intent and usage" is. If
this is defined, it will obviously make the semantics of the two
To improve the readability of class diagrams when everything is
associations, I propose that associations should be possible to
represent as text in the compartment where attributes are written today.
Reported: UML 1.3 — Wed, 25 Oct 2000 04:00 GMT
Disposition: Resolved — UML 1.4.2
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT