The last sentence of the bullet defining the Basic Stream type: "The data is consumed and produced by component implementation logic as octet sequences, unless the basic stream type". The last clause seems misplaced, and should probably be dropped

Resolution: Delete the last clause

The following constraints in 7.2.10 are incorrect: [1] A ConstantDef must be defined in a Container [2] A TypedefDef must be defined in a Container [6] An ExceptionDef must be defined in a Container [8] An InterfaceDef must be defined within a ModuleDef [9] A ValueDef must be defined within a ModuleDef Each of these can be defined as "global scope" (as is acknowledged in 7.2.3: "Modules can contain any definition that can appear at global scope (type, constant, exception, and interface definitions)"

see above

Figure 8.12: A first attribute should have type A::B rather than B with clarification

For more clarification the Figure 8.12 should be updated

The replacement text, first bullet: "Array ... multidimensional array dimension (e.g.: “index”=n, m)." is unclear why there are two ways to represent array index. Do all arrays representations have a Tag for index, even if the attribute multiplicity is used in the case of one dimensional array. It should state that the multiplicity for a multi dimension array is the product of all the dimension values (e.g, integer [2][3] has multiplicity 6. Also, it needs to be clarified whether the member attribute is in row major or collumn major order

see resolution to issue 10835

The list of Normative References contains the CORBA Component Model Specification, Version 4.0 twice, but does not have a normative reference to the CORBA specification

see above

More clarification text about order of CORBAStruct members is needed

see resolution to issue 10836

Initiated by Frank Pilhofer (Mercury Computer Systems: At the moment there are two OMG specification documents: the UML Profile for CORBA (formal/02-04-01) and the UML Profile for CORBA Component Model (formal/05-07-06). More clarification is needed about relationships between mentioned above two specs and this current final adopted spec. What are the differences between all profiles and migration rules from one to another?

see above

Initiated by Tom Rutt (Fujitsu) "According to the metamodel for UML (uml super fig 7-12 and 7-13) the OwnedAttribute association end of class and data type is ordered, and includes both "attributes" and "association ends". So from UML point of view the Struct mapping is ok in the current spec. (However some tools have trouble ordering across attributes and association ends). The FTF may decide to not use the association version of containment for Struct members which are themselves complex types

No Data Available

Initiated from Tom Rutt (Fujitsu): "Something similar to Sequences could be done for array mappings as well."

see above

Initiated from Tom Rutt (Fujitsu: "The sequence mapping needs either fixing or clarification. I am still concerned about the complexity and yet incompleteness of the profile mapping for CORBA sequences and arrays. Suggestion: AnonymousSequence types are named by concatenation containing type "::" "m"<n> , where n is the member number of the anonymous sequence in containing type, e. g bar::m2 for second member of Struct bar (P. 31, Figure 8.15). Also I suggest to represent the sequence element values as a multivalued attribute with lower bound 0 and upper bound = sequence size or "*". This seems to work and is much easier to understand. Also, it requires NO NEW TAGGED VALUES for Sequencies."

see below