UPDM — The "to/from" tagged values for Protocol should have better names

The "to/from" tagged values for Protocol should have better names. Since we're modelling protocol stacks, lowerLayer and higherLayer seem more appropriate. It may also help ease confusion.
Diagram SV-2
Document Issue UPDM (OMG Beta) Jan 2009

Source Phillip AstleArtisan Software Toolsphillip.astle@artisansoftwaretools.com

Rationale This should help people to understand what the relationship is for (currently it's a little ambiguous).
Resolution: We'll add a new stereotype called ProtocolLayer which extends Property. This will be applied to the composite properties that exist between Protocols. The tags will be replaced with metaConstraints for the Protocol's "ownedAttribute" role and the ProtocolLayer's "type" role. Since ownedAttribute is ordered, the higher/lower layer concept is maintained. This will allow people to model protocol stacks on Class/Composite Structure Diagrams.

We'll add a new stereotype called ProtocolLayer which extends Property. This will be applied to the composite properties that exist between Protocols. The tags will be replaced with metaConstraints for the Protocol's "ownedAttribute" role and the ProtocolLayer's "type" role. Since ownedAttribute is ordered, the higher/lower layer concept is maintained. This will allow people to model protocol stacks on Class/Composite Structure Diagrams.