-
Key: UML22-558
-
Legacy Issue Number: 7949
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Paranor AG ( Earl Waldin)
-
Summary:
The OCL for the derivation of association /opposite for Property in section 7.3.44, page 126 is incorrect. It's derivation in section "Constraints" on page 126 as given as follows: [1] If this property is owned by a class, associated with a binary association, and the other end of the association is also owned by a class, then opposite gives the other end. opposite = if owningAssociation->notEmpty() and association.memberEnd->size() = 2 then let otherEnd = (association.memberEnd - self)
>any() in if otherEnd.owningAssociation>notEmpty() then otherEnd else Set{} endif else Set {} endif I think that the prose "this property is owned by a class" should translate into "class" and not "owningAssociation" in the above OCL. In other words, the prose does not agree with the OCL. So contraint [1] for opposite should read opposite = if class->notEmpty() and ... let ... in if otherEnd.class -> notEmpty() then ... else Set {} endif -
Reported: UML 1.4.2 — Fri, 26 Nov 2004 05:00 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — UML 2.1
-
Disposition Summary:
See issue 6201 for disposition
-
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT