Re: UML 2.0 Issues



Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view

From: Prof. Dr. Peter H. Schmitt (pschmitt@ira.uka.de)
Date: Fri 14 Feb 2003 - 09:00:21 GMT


Gerrit Renker wrote:

> 5/ FINALLY
>  On a personal note, I find the current state truly Babelian,
>  lots of upcoming great ideas but the (OMG) future entirely 
>  opaque. An example is the semantics in OCL -- people have
>  come up at least with 3 different OCL semantics. Richters'
>  is adopted in the appendix of the current OCL spec, but the
>  normative one is still the UML 1.4 semantics, based on
>  meta-models and natural language.
> 
> It would definetely help if someone could say a few clarifying words
> here.

My view on this last issue - 3 semantics for OCL - is, that they are 
assumed to be one and the same semantics written down in three different
ways. Problem is, that knowbody, so far, has attempted to verifiy
this claim

regard  Peter.



-- 
Prof. Dr. Peter H. Schmitt
Institut fuer LKD                 Fakultaet fuer Informatik
Universitaet Karlsruhe            D-76128 Karlsruhe 

Tel. 0721-608-4000 (Sekr.) -3919  Fax. 0721-608-4211

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Attachment view