Value Delivery Modeling Language Avatar
  1. OMG Specification

Value Delivery Modeling Language — Closed Issues

  • Acronym: VDML
  • Issues Count: 25
  • Description: Issues resolved by a task force and approved by Board
Closed All
Issues resolved by a task force and approved by Board

Issues Summary

Key Issue Reported Fixed Disposition Status
VDML11-31 Element (CMOF) - consistency between SMM 1.1 and VDML 1.0. VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-30 Consider defining the class Performer VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-28 Missing constraint on Capability Offer applied by Activity VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-27 Redundant constraints of Activity, Role and Collaboration VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-35 VDML 1.1 should be integrated with SMM 1.2 VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-33 Consider removing "OutputPort" from caption of Fig. 8.20 VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-32 Consider removing the sentence "This diagram begins to show integration with SMM..." VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-43 Refinement of notation for Deliverable Flow VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-29 Problematic constraint on Role, Participant and Collaboration VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-26 A Collaboration may contain any number of Activities. VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-25 There is no VDML Characteristic VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-23 Explanation of impact of model integrating on Scenarios is not clear enough VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-21 VDML spec overpromises on modeling of the actual transformation work VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-19 Confusing statement on Scenarios and context trees VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-17 Incomplete statement on the use of resources VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-15 Imprecise statement about Activity Value contributions VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-13 Unclear statements on Business Items and Deliverable Flows VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-36 Consider replacing string by String in the diagrams VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-34 The "other" multiplicity end of association to Characteristic is not shown VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-1 Readability of sub-clause 7.1 could be improved VDML 1.0b1 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-10 Normative reference to CMMN is missing VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-8 Sentence about Capability is unclear, redundant and also in a wrong place VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-6 Statement about net economic value is unclear VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed
VDML11-4 Clause 8 not mentioned VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Closed; No Change closed
VDML11-2 Add VDML logo VDML 1.0 VDML 1.1 Resolved closed

Issues Descriptions

Element (CMOF) - consistency between SMM 1.1 and VDML 1.0.

  • Key: VDML11-31
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    VDML 1.0 integrates with SMM 1.1. In the SMM specification, in Figure 71, it is demonstrated that Element (CMOF) does not own measurement (the opposite association end, but rather the association owns it. However, when the same association is shown in the VDML 1.0 specification, in Figure 7.19, on page 59 of sub-clause 7.2.4.1, it shows with the measurement owned by Element (CMOF). This does not seem correct. The same problem is there in Figure 7.29, on page 82, in sub-clause 7.2.6.2.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:14 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Fix SMM association in diagrams in VDML

    Show SMM association correctly in two diagrams in the VDML specification.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT
  • Attachments:

Consider defining the class Performer

  • Key: VDML11-30
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Figure 7.16, in sub-clause 7.2.2.4 (Capability Methods), page 51, shows the class “Performer”, but it appears that it is never defined. Consider adding its Class definition to the VDML specification.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:08 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Define the class Performer

    Add a new Sub-clause to define the class Performer

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Missing constraint on Capability Offer applied by Activity

  • Key: VDML11-28
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    There must be consistency between the Capability Method to which an Activity delegates (in a particular Delegation Context) and the Capability Offer that is applied by the Activity. A constraint, to enforce this consistency, is missing in the specification. It should be added.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:54 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add missing constraint

    Add the missing constraint.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Redundant constraints of Activity, Role and Collaboration

  • Key: VDML11-27
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Constraint “Activities that are performed by a Role MUST be contained in the same Collaboration that also contains the Role.” in Constraints of sub-clause 7.2.1.1.5 (Role Class), on page 31, is redundant with constraint “The Role that performs an Activity MUST be contained in the Collaboration that also contains the Activity.” in Constraints of sub-clause 7.2.1.2.1 (Activity Class), on page 34

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:48 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove redundant constraint from Role

    Remove the redundant constraint from the Role Class.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

VDML 1.1 should be integrated with SMM 1.2

  • Key: VDML11-35
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    The VDML 1.0 specification integrates with SMM 1.1. Meanwhile SMM has been upgraded to SMM 1.1.1. But, as VDML needs to be revised, to a new revision VDML 1.1, and meanwhile SMM is revised to SMM 1.2, the integration of VDML 1.1 should be with SMM 1.2

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:33 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    *Integrate VDML 1.1 with SMM 1.2 *

    This impacts both the VDML 1.1 xmi and the specification. In the specification, both the reference in the references list is updated and the Package diagram that shows the integration.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT
  • Attachments:

Consider removing "OutputPort" from caption of Fig. 8.20

  • Key: VDML11-33
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 8.4 (Activity Network), in the caption of Figure 8.20, page 90, says “Shape of OutputPort, with ValueAdd, on boundary of Activity OutputPort”. It does not seem correct. The word ”OutputPort” at the end should be removed.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:21 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove the wrong word from the Figure's caption

    Remove the wrong word "OutputPort" from the Figure's caption

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Consider removing the sentence "This diagram begins to show integration with SMM..."

  • Key: VDML11-32
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 7.2.4.1, right above Figure 19, on page 59, says: "This diagram begins to show integration with SMM, discussed later.". But already in an earlier sub-clause, about Analysis Context and Scenario, integration with SMM was specified (to Observation). So it is not true that "this diagram (i.e., Figure 19) begins to show integration with SMM". Removing the sentence would be the easiest way to fix this.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:17 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove incorrect statement

    Remove the incorrect statement. It can safely be removed without losing essential information.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Refinement of notation for Deliverable Flow

  • Key: VDML11-43
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    The VDML specification specifies that the name of the deliverable on the Deliverable Flow is shown alongside the connector that represents the Deliverable Flow. This is bit limited, and can easily be extended to make it more useful.
    Furthermore, the text that specifies connectors in Activity Network Diagrams contain a few text errors, such as "along the alongside the connector", as well as a redundantly repeated phrase "Also here, the name along the alongside the connector represents the name of the deliverable.". Please fix that also.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Extended form of text alongside connector

    Extend text alongside the connector with state of the deliverable.
    Fix the text errors in the text about connectors in Activity Network Diagram.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Problematic constraint on Role, Participant and Collaboration

  • Key: VDML11-29
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 7.2.1.2.3 (Assignment Class), page 36, has a constraint that says, page 37: “A Role MUST NOT be assigned to more than one Participant that is a Collaboration, unless the additional Assignments are context-based, i.e., contained by DelegationContext”. This constraint has several problems. It ignores the fact that participations can be indirect, through a chain of assignments (“roles of roles”). It also ignores the fact that context-based assignments are not only possible with delegation contexts (i.e., children in the context tree), but also with scenarios (the top of context tree). Furthermore, this constraint was written with Position roles in mind, but leaves too much room for invalid situations for other types of roles.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:01 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Replace constraint

    Replace the problematic constraint by three other constraints.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

A Collaboration may contain any number of Activities.

  • Key: VDML11-26
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 7.1.13 (Scenarios and Contexts), page 23, says: “When the Activity of a Collaboration delegates to another Collaboration in order to engage a shared Capability, that particular use of the sub-Collaboration may be one of many.” It is confusing to talk about “the” Activity of a Collaboration. A Collaboration may contain any number of Activities.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:46 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Withdraw false suggestion from the text about Activities

    Fix the text, so that it no longer attaches false connotation to Activities.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

There is no VDML Characteristic

  • Key: VDML11-25
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 7.1.12 (Measures), page 22, says: “A Measure is applied to a Characteristic, such as weight of a part, to determine a Measurement that expresses the value of the Characteristic for a particular VDML model element.” And a bit further, on the same page: “VDML Characteristics reflect statistical Measurements per unit of production.”. In the light of Figure 7, this does not seem correct. Because VDML has MeasuredCharacterstic, referring to Characteristic in SMM. Strictly spoken there is no "VDML Characteristic".

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:43 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Use MeasuredCharacteristic instead of Characterstic in two sentences

    Fix two sentences, by referring to MeasuredCharacteristic, instead of Characteristic.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Explanation of impact of model integrating on Scenarios is not clear enough

  • Key: VDML11-23
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    Point 3 in sub-clause 7.1.15 (Model Integration), and the last paragraph of that sub-clause, both on page 27, contain incorrect and confusing statements. It talks about "direct and indirect delegations" and "non-delegation inputs and outputs". In the context of the meta-model, it is unclear what these mean. It also says: "A branch of a delegation tree in one Scenario may then be assigned as a delegation from an Activity in the other Scenario.” The word “assigned” is mis-used here, as, in the VDML specification this term is reserved for assignment of a role. It is also unclear, with the actual meta-model in mind, what the sentence actually means.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:40 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Making explanation more clear and consistent with the meta-model

    Making explanation more clear and consistent with the meta-model.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

VDML spec overpromises on modeling of the actual transformation work

  • Key: VDML11-21
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    The second and third paragraph of sub-clause 7.1.14 (Staff Collaborations), on page 26, are suggesting that VDML can be used to model transformation work, involved in transformation of the business that is also modeled. This is bit misleading and tends to overpromise.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Wed, 15 Nov 2017 16:22 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove false expectations about modeling of actual transformation work

    Rewrite sentences to remove false expectations about modeling of the actual transformation work

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Confusing statement on Scenarios and context trees

  • Key: VDML11-19
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    In sub-clause 7.1.13 (Scenarios and Contexts), page 25, right above Figure 7.5, it says: "Since Assignments can also be context dependent, the delegations of one Scenario can differ from those of another Scenario thus forming a different tree." But the phrase "Since Assignments can also be context dependent" is irrelevant here, because: delegations of one Scenario (i.e., sub-Collaborations in DelegationContext nodes in the Scenario tree) can be different from those of another Scenario anyway.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:48 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Give statement on Scenarios and context trees better meaning

    Give statement on Scenarios and context trees better meaning, by removing some words.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Incomplete statement on the use of resources

  • Key: VDML11-17
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    In sub-clause 7.1.11 (Resources and Stores), page 22, it says: “The cumulative duration of these uses will determine the consumption of available resource time. This, along with the rate of production, will determine if the Pool of resources will always have resources available or will introduce some additional wait-time for assignment of a resource.”. This only talks about assigning a resource. But before it can be assigned, one may need to wait till it gets released. Can this be worked into the sentence, to make it better reflecting that also.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:34 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Make statement about resources complete

    Make statement about the use of resources more complete, referring also to the concept of releasing of a resource.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Imprecise statement about Activity Value contributions

  • Key: VDML11-15
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    In sub-clause 7.1.9 (Activity), page 22, it says: "Conversely, all values can be traced back to their contributors. This is possible, because VDML is not representing the actual paths of each unit of production, but rather the statistical use of various Activities that contribute to results achieved over some period of time. That representative set of results includes some Activities that are only active for some units of production due to product features, operating exceptions, defects, repairs, sample testing, machine failures, and so on." The word "includes" (see above in bold) sounds strange to me. Because Activities are not included in a set of results. Is maybe a different verb meant or was it meant to say something different ?

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:21 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Revise imprecise statement

    Imprecise statement about Activity Value contributions revised.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Unclear statements on Business Items and Deliverable Flows

  • Key: VDML11-13
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    In sub-clause 7.1.9 (Activity), page 20, it says: "A BusinessItem (...) may flow through a delegation to a sub-Collaboration, or be the input or output of a Collaboration." How is the following meant: "be the input or output of a Collaboration" ? Is that only saying in other words what is said with "may flow through a delegation to a sub-Collaboration"? Similar doubt regarding the immediate next sentence: "Flow of BusinessItems into and out of Activities as well as Collaborations is depicted by DeliverableFlows." The phrase of "as well as Collaborations" is a bit arguable. As known, DeliverableFlows do not connect Ports of Collaborations directly.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:56 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Revise unclear statements

    Unclear statements about Business Items and Deliverable Flows revised.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Consider replacing string by String in the diagrams

  • Key: VDML11-36
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    In the VDML 1.0 specification, the definition text in the specification assumes the UML predefined type “String” (with capital “S”), however, the meta-model diagrams expose the type “string” (lower case “s”). This means that the meta-model (and so the XMI) actually use the type “string”. This has several problems. Firstly, it is not a predefined UML type, and the VDML specification neither defines it, so, it is basically undefined. Secondly, SMM 1.1 is integrated into VDML 1.0, and SMM 1.1 uses the predefined UML type “String” (with capital “S”). Hence VDML has better also use the UML type “String”.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Mon, 20 Nov 2017 13:19 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Replacing string by String in diagrams and in the model

    Replacing undefined "string" type by the predefined UML type "String", in the model (and hence in the XMI) and in some diagrams in the specification.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

The "other" multiplicity end of association to Characteristic is not shown

  • Key: VDML11-34
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: DXC Technology ( Pavel Hruby)
  • Summary:

    In sub-clause 7.2.5.1 (BusinessItemLibrary), in Figure 7.23, page 68, the multiplicity on end of BusinessItemLibraryElement (of association to Characteristic) is not shown. It should be shown as (0..*). The same problem also occurs in the following three places:
    1) In sub-clause 7.2.5.2 (ValueLibrary), in Figure 7.24, page 70, the multiplicity on end of ValueDefinition (of association to Characteristic) is not shown. It should be shown as (0..*).
    2) In sub-clause 7.2.5.3 (CapabilityLibrary), in Figure 7.25, page 73, the multiplicity on end of Capability (of association to Characteristic) is not shown. It should be shown as (0..*).
    3) In sub-clause 7.2.5.5 (RoleLibrary), in Figure 7.27, page 79, the multiplicity on end of RoleDefinition (of association to Characteristic) is not shown. It should be shown as (0..*).

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:29 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Show multiplicity on association ends in four places

    Add the missed visualization of multiplicity on the four association ends.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT
  • Attachments:

Readability of sub-clause 7.1 could be improved

  • Key: VDML11-1
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    The explanation of Figure 7.2 (Capability Offers), in last paragraph of sub-clause 7.1.8 (Capability Method), is a bit difficult to read (page 19). Can the readability of it be improved. Similarly, the first paragraph of sub-clause 7.1.9 (Activity) is a bit difficult to read (also on page 19). Can you improve readability there as well.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0b1 — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 14:44 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Improve readability of sub-clause 7.1

    Update text, so that things are more clearly explained.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Normative reference to CMMN is missing

  • Key: VDML11-10
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    In sub-clause 7.1.8 (Capability Method) the specification talks about CMMN, but it is not listed as reference.
    More-over, BPMN is included as reference twice.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:46 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add reference to CMMN

    Add a normative reference to CMMN to sub-clause 3.1, and remove redundant reference to BPMN from sub-clause 3.2.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Sentence about Capability is unclear, redundant and also in a wrong place

  • Key: VDML11-8
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 7.1.7 (Organization Unit) says "A Capability may produce value directly for a customer or it may contribute value when it is engaged in a specific Activity of a value stream.".
    It is unclear what the first half of the sentence means. The second part of the sentence talks about concepts that will be dealt with, and will be dealt with more clearly, in later sub-clauses, and are referred to too early here therefore.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:08 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Remove confusing and redundant sentence

    This sentence will be removed, as it is indeed unclear and redundant.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Statement about net economic value is unclear

  • Key: VDML11-6
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    Sub-clause 7.1.6 (Business Networks) talks about the net economic value for a party, and how it can be modeled. This statement is a bit fuzzy and is influenced by some elements in the VDML beta1 meta-model around Value Propositions and Business Networks, that got changed in VDML 1.0.

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 09:49 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Make statement about net economic value more clear

    Make statement in sub-clause 7.1.6, about net economic value, more clear, and more obvious in the light of the meta-model.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Clause 8 not mentioned

  • Key: VDML11-4
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    Clause 8 (Notation) is not mentioned in sub-clause 6.3 (Guide to the Specification).

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:39 GMT
  • Disposition: Closed; No Change — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    No change needed

    This missing information was actually added in the formal VDML 1.0 specifiation, though it was missing in the Word version that was delivered by the submission team and that was the basis for adoption. We just overlooked that. So this issue is actually no issue.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT

Add VDML logo

  • Key: VDML11-2
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: VDMbee ( Henk de Man)
  • Summary:

    Add VDML logo to the VDML specification

  • Reported: VDML 1.0 — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:18 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — VDML 1.1
  • Disposition Summary:

    Add VDML logo

    The VDML logo is added to the front page of the VDML specification.

  • Updated: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:22 GMT
  • Attachments: