UML 2.3 RTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

UML23 — Japan Superstructure PAS Ballot Comments - comment 8

Open Closed All
  • Key: UML23-103
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14265
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    GT Distinction between normative and informative part is unclear.

    Make distinction between normative and informative part.
  • Reported: UML 2.2 — Wed, 2 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — UML 2.3
  • Disposition Summary:

    Ensure that all annexes are labled as "normative" or "informative"
    All statements in the body of the spec (unless explicitly stated as informative) are considered as normative. The formal semantics of use of term "may" from resolution to Issue 14259 (jp 2) clarifies its use as in normative statements.
    Eg: In Section "Notation" in 7.3.3 Association" the sentence:
    "Users may conceptualize the dot as showing that the model includes a property of the type represented by the classifier touched by the dot."
    is a normative statement.
  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT