UML 2.2 RTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

UML22 — Regarding the quote on p128

  • Key: UML22-1368
  • Legacy Issue Number: 12169
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: International Business Machines ( James Bruck)
  • Summary:

    In the 2.1.1 specification (070205):

    Regarding the quote on p128:
    "All redefinitions should be made explicit with the use of a

    {redefines <x>}

    property string. Matching features in subclasses without an explicit redefinition result in a redefinition that need not be shown in the notation. Redefinition prevents inheritance of a redefined element into the redefinition context thereby making the name of the redefined element available for reuse, either for the redefining element, or for some other."

    I interpret the following quote from the UML 2.1.1 spec to mean that when a subclass includes a property whose name is equal to a property in one of its general classes, then it should be treated as a redefinition even if there is no explicit redefinition between those properties in the model.
    This should be clarified in the spec. It is unclear and also includes at least one spelling mistake. Alternatively, we should ban implicit redefinitions and flag them as simple name conflicts.

    Two features of the same kind defined in a class and a superclass (i.e., they are both either structural features or behavioral features) does indeed imply a redefinition and, therefore, must conform to the compatibility constraint on redefinitions.

  • Reported: UML 2.1.2 — Tue, 8 Jan 2008 05:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — UML 2.2
  • Disposition Summary:

    No Data Available

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 22:56 GMT