Relationship between regions and transitions



Relationship between regions and transitions

From: Alessandro Folli <alessandro.folli_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:11:30 +0100
Message-ID: <bb656e9d0612110411l61159d94oa95f2d31e2e64cc0@mail.gmail.com>
I need a clarification about the State Machine Diagrams. I have read the UML
2.0 Superstructure specification and I can't understand how the relationship
between regions and transitions exactly works.

I have found the specification of a previous version of UML. Regions were
not present and it explains the realtionship between StateMachine e
Transitions in this way:

"Transition Associations: Associates the StateMachine with its Transitions.
Note that internal Transitions are owned by the State and not by the
StateMachine. All other Transitions which are essentially relationships
between States are owned by the StateMachine. Multiplicity is '0..*'. "

Anyway maybe this concept is still valid and the transitions are contained
by the top-level region, but it's not really well defined. Talking about
region's associations the Specification 2.0 says: "Transition: The set of
transitions owned by the region. Note that internal transitions are owned by
a region, but applies to the source state."

Is it correct if I consider that the transitions are contained by the
top-level region?

Thank you.

  Alessandro
Received on Mon 11 Dec 2006 - 12:12:01 GMT