-
Key: UML22-1116
-
Legacy Issue Number: 10777
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Commissariat a l Energie Atomique-CEA ( Dr. Sebastien Gerard)
-
Summary:
My new question is about the notation for Trigger. In on ehand, I understand the notation as described in section 13.3.31 (p. 475) for specifyng the trigger of a transition in a statemachine (even if it is not so clear because the notation for Trigger refers in fact to the notation of event (p475) ?). But how is it possible to describe the Trigger owned by a classifier? What is the notation for a class to specify which Trigger a class is owning?
In previous version of UML, it was clear in my head (it does no harm just this once that the description of the behavioral features (either Operations, or Receptions) of a class was implicitly the description of what kind of events a class may reponse to. But now, one hand a class specify its behavioral features, but what happen with its Triggers? Is the description of the behavioral features of a class the implicit description of its Triggers? But in this case, as Trigger are linked to Events, what is the need this intermediate concept of Triggers? -
Reported: UML 2.1 — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 05:00 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — UML 2.1.2
-
Disposition Summary:
Discussion: There is no notation for trigger independent of its specific notation in a behavioral feature. (Note that this notation reduces to the specific notation for the associated event.) For example, in state machines, a notation is defined for representing triggers on states or transitions. Disposition: Closed, no change
-
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT