IDL4 now has a IDL map, maybe UCM can add the map also? When the map support is there the specification could provide a more cleaner API by changing ucm::Properties from a struct to a map

The XML schema seems to contain a few errors.

Declarations of entities «value» (line 281), «param» (line 342) and «BindingSet» (line 670) lack attributes «id».

Declarations of entities «AbstractInterface» (line 361) and «AbstractDataType» (line 369) have attributes «annotation» that do not match the metamodel.

Declaration of «itemBinding» (line 547) contains the declaration of a tag «comment», which does not match the metamodel.

File ucm_base.dtd seems to contain a few errors.

According to the UCM metamodel, every named entity can have an id. Among the tags that correspond to UCM named entities, some lack the attribute «id»: «namespace», «value», «param» and «componentModule».

Also, tags «abstractInterface» (line 159) and «abstractDataType» (line 163) have an attribute «annotation» while the corresponding classes in the UCM metamodel do not inherit from IAnnotable class.

Tag «itemBinding» (line 251) has an attribute «comment», which is not consistent with the metamodel.

The bounded sequence maps to a std::array but that is very heavy in terms of memory management. In a lot of use cases a sequence bound is set to limit the size, but by mapping it to a std::array the result is that the maximum is allocated directly in memory. IDL to C+11 doesn't require this, it maps to a distinct type that supports the bound, but not to a std::array. Would recommend to update this mapping to match with IDL to C+11

Also a constant is mapped to const, in a lot of cases it can be mapped to a constexpr, which is even better, see IDL to C++11

The content of file ucm_core.xml (ptc/21-05-06) is inconsistent with the main document (formal/22-05-01): Section 13.1.3.1 of document formal/22-05-01 contains the following declaration:

<policyDef applicability="on_component_only" aspect="comp_exec_asp" name="unpr_pasv_comp">
  <comment>unprotected passive component</comment>
</policyDef>

while file ucm_core.xml contains at lines 83 – 85:

<policyDef applicability="on_all_ports" aspect="comp_exec_asp" name="unpr_pasv_comp">
  <comment>unprotected passive component</comment>
</policyDef>

Technical policy definition unpr_pasv_comp corresponds to a passive, unprotected, component. This means the technical policy is likely not to control any port of the component it is associated with. Hence, the definition in document formal/22-05-01 seems to be the more approriate.

The additional component execution policies module defines an enumeration for time units (named ucm_time_unit_t) with s (second), ms (millisecond) and ns (nanosecond). Microsecond is missing, while it is commonly used in real-time systems.

In the clean PDF file, a table is missing in section 16.1. It appears in the document with change bars, though.