UML 1.4 MAILINGLIST Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

UML14 — use of stereotypes

  • Key: UML14-525
  • Legacy Issue Number: 7213
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Today, the reason for this mail is that in my UML certification I was asked a question regarding the include and extend relationship between use cases.
    I was (and am still a bit) confused, because one question was dealing with the extend and include notation between use cases. I think the 640 pages UML 2 documnet 03-08-02.pdf is inconsistent here. (I now ask because I think I lost two correct answers in my fundamental UML 2 certification caused by include/includes and extend/extends...): UML 1 used the stereotype notations "extends" and "includes". Im UML 2, the classifiers are now called "include" and "extend". But confusingly enough, some association arrows inside the OMG document 03-08-02.pdf
    "UML Superstructure 2.0 Draft Adopted Specification" use the stereotypes (see <<extends>> and <<includes>> in Fig 406 p. 521 and twice <<extends>> and one time <<includes>> in Table 22 on page 523/524.)

    Who to report these inconsistencies to? Or are the stererotypes still allowed to be labeled <<extends>> and one time <<includes>> ?

  • Reported: XMI 2.0 — Fri, 26 Mar 2004 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — UML 1.4.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    Duplicate of issue 6465.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT