MOF 2.0 Facility And Object  Lifecycle Specification Avatar
  1. OMG Specification

MOF 2.0 Facility And Object Lifecycle Specification — Open Issues

  • Acronym: MOFFOL
  • Issues Count: 8
  • Description: Issues not resolved
Open Closed All
Issues not resolved

Issues Descriptions

MOF Facility Object Lifecycle (FOL) 2.0: Is there a URIStor or not?

  • Key: MOF26-24
  • Legacy Issue Number: 18903
  • Status: open  
  • Source: NASA ( Nicolas Rouquette)
  • Summary:

    The figure in section 6.2 shows a URIStore class with two broken lines (associations? Generalizations? Something else?)
    There is no entry for URIStore in the spec but there is a reference to it in 6.2.1.3:

    Facility::createStore(name : String, contextURI : String[0..1], ….)

    The description of the contextURI parameter says:

    The URI to be used to address this Store. If specified, an instance of URIStore will be created.

    So, is there a URIStore metaclass in MOF FOL or not?

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2013 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

MOF Facility Object Lifecycle (FOL) 2.0: 6.4.2 Session does not appear in any diagram

  • Key: MOF26-25
  • Legacy Issue Number: 18902
  • Status: open  
  • Source: NASA ( Nicolas Rouquette)
  • Summary:

    MOF Facility Object Lifecycle (FOL) 2.0: 6.4.2 Session does not appear in any diagram

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2013 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

MOF Facility Object Lifecycle (MOF FOL) 2.0: inconsistency about Facility::getWorkspace()

  • Key: MOF26-26
  • Legacy Issue Number: 18901
  • Status: open  
  • Source: NASA ( Nicolas Rouquette)
  • Summary:

    The overview diagram in section 6.2 shows an operation:

    Facility::getWorkspace(id : String[0..1]) : Workspace

    However, section 6.2.1.3 describes an operation with a different signature:

    Facility::getWorkspace(id : String[0..1]) : Workspace[0..*]

    Which is it?

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Wed, 11 Sep 2013 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

Section 7 of formal/2010-03-04

  • Key: MOF26-27
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15647
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Adaptive ( Pete Rivett)
  • Summary:

    2. Section 7 should be applied to the other specifications not left in this specification

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

Issues on MOF Facility formal/10-03-04

  • Key: MOF26-28
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15643
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Adaptive ( Pete Rivett)
  • Summary:

    1. The figures should have numbers and captions

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

Incomplete URIStore definition

  • Key: MOF26-30
  • Legacy Issue Number: 15642
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    The diagram on p6 includes URIStore but with incomplete lines.

    There is no subsection for it in 6.2.

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 04:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

Migration of package relationships

  • Key: MOF26-31
  • Legacy Issue Number: 6909
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Adaptive ( Pete Rivett)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    At MOF 1.4, packages can be related through:

    • import
    • nesting
    • inheritance
    • clustering
      We haven't really addressed this aspect of migration which should be added to Chapter 9.
      Personally I think there's little value in MOF 1.4 nesting and inheritance relationships and they're infrequently used in real metamodels (if people know what they're doing - occasionally people nest packages in UML Profile for MOF without realizing the implications).

    In UML2 though we do still have a nesting relationship between packages so should consider the implications in terms of MOF constraints and extents.

    Conversely we no longer have clustering (the most useful relationship in MOF 1.4) though we do have merging (with 2 flavors): we need to consider the runtime implications of instantiating a package that merges other packages. Is it the same as clustering?

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Thu, 15 Jan 2004 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT

Need to specify URI structure

  • Key: MOF26-29
  • Legacy Issue Number: 6904
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Adaptive ( Pete Rivett)
  • Summary:

    Summary:
    isID semantics - the 'may be used' is too weak. I think myself and Joaquin have made the point that we
    need to specify the URI structure to get interoperability (and I don't mean the W3C standard - I mean how to construct
    the URI from the objects/extents/properties/containers being identified).

  • Reported: MOFFOL 2.0b1 — Thu, 15 Jan 2004 05:00 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:43 GMT