[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: ISSUE LOGGED: ASSEMBLY-2: Use of UML 2.0
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-2 On Sep 28, 2007, at 4:27 AM, Martin Chapman wrote: > TARGET: Assembly spec > > DESCRIPTION: copied from > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200709/msg00034.html > > Martin & Mike, > > I would like to know why an visual modeling industry standard such > as OMG UML 2 was not used (and currently not being used) to > represent SCA artifacts; specifically, SCA Component and SCA > Composite diagrams. It seems a no-brainer to leverage the UML 2 > component diagram to represent SCA components and UML 2 composite > structure diagrams to represent SCA composites. The current > diagram formats used in all SCA specs from Open SOA (and now under > the auspices of OASIS) seem to use custom diagram semantics to > represent services, references, and properties when UML 2 provided > and required interfaces and the use of ports would suffice just > fine for both SCA components and composites. > > I ask because there is probably some history to this decision and > since I did not participate in development of the Open SOA specs, > I'm curious as to why an industry standard such as UML 2 was not > used and if it is worth considering for use in the OASIS version of > these specs; particularly, since these are architecture-centric > artifacts. > > Regards... > > - Jeff Estefan, JPL > > PROPOSAL: None > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]