The figure references UML4SysML which is no longer part of/used by the version of SysML (1.3) included in the normative references

The figure should reference UML package instead of the UML4SysML package.

The figure references UML4SysML which is no longer part of/used by the version of SysML (1.3) included in the normative references

See issue 17214 for disposition

The namespace definition in the XMI and the URI attribute of the Profile is xmlns:SysML4Modelica=http://www.omg.org/spec/SysM/20120213. This uses SysM not the official directory (according to the other documents) which is the shorter SyM.

The spec name “SysM” was wrongly used in the XMI definition of the SysML4Modelica profile. It needs to be changed to the shorter "SyM" version.

In general the Part structure used is not appropriate for OMG specifications. It does not make sense to label Part I as non-normative. Especially as Part I includes Conformance and Normative References!

The part structure is kept since it is still considered helpful to structure the document. Part 1 needs to be labeled as normative.

the new figure still uses <<conformsTo>> <<transformation>> and <<instanceOf>> applied to lines using the Dependency notation. These have no defined meaning (either as keywords nor as stereotypes defined either in this specification, SysML or UML). Whatever <<instanceOf>> means it’s not the case that a transformationRecord is an instance of a transformation. If these stereotypes are retained there should be an explanation to say they are purely informal

An additional sentence needs to be added stating that the <<conformsTo>>, <<transformation>> and <<instanceOf>> stereotypes are purely informal

In the SysML-Modelica Transformation Specification (http://www.omg.org/spec/SyM/1.0/Beta1/PDF/), the attribute fromLibrary for the stereotype «modelicaClassDefinition» is not sufficiently clearly defined (Section 8.2, page 10). The spec mentions that some details (e.g. "value properties and parts") can be omitted when using the fromLibrary tag, but the spec is not sufficiently precise as to which details exactly can/should be omitted and which should still be retained. Since this is a construct that will likely be used extensively, it should be defined more precisely.

The identified issue does not relate to the mapping of language constructs between SysML and Modelica but rather to a user- and tool-specific usability aspect of the transformation. The issue therefore does not identify a problem with the specification. Additionally, the “fromLibrary” attribute of the «modelicaClassDefinition» stereotype will be removed since it does not relate to the mapping of language constructs between SysML and Modelica.

Section 2 includes in Level 0 Compliance “The SysML4Modelica profile must be compliant with OMG SysML v1.3.”. However a) this profile is part of this specification and b) SysML does not define compliance for Profiles. So it’s unclear what compliance would mean

In order to avoid any confusion, the sentence "The SysML4Modelica profile must be compliant with OMG SysML v1.3" should be remove.