[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] Final draft recommendations for CC's and Registry -UML/UMM Profile for CCTS
Duane Nickull wrote: > Seems logical to me ;-) > > So are we agreeing? We seem to be? Maybe ;) The statements such as "A machine cannot parse the internal structure of a *.jpg diagram." "UML is a two dimensional syntax concerned with rendering (upon which implications of structure can be interpreted by a human viewing the UML) and cannot be parsed accurately by an application" ....did throw me of track. As well as: "We have successfully demonstrated it for machine automated assembly and deriviation of BIE's from a set of bound core components and a context declaration statement. No one else has done that yet to my knowledge. " For you info this can be done with a UML profile for CCTS, which is what we have created. /anders > > ;-) > > Anders W. Tell wrote: > >> Duane Nickull wrote: >> >>> I am not disputing that XMI can be used. I am sure it can be used. >>> I am disputing that UML itself (without XMI) can be used >> >> >> >> But this is the point, the recommended mechanism to serialize a "UML >> models" is using the MOF model of UML X.y and applying the XMI >> principles. This is what UML vendors have been doing for years?! >> >>> and noting that whatever we use, UN/CEFACT should standardize that >>> thing. >> >> >> >> This is exactly what we are doing, we even got a projectplan and an >> very active project for it. We have also scheduled a conference in >> Stockholm where we are about to discuss UML in a UN/CEFACT >> environment. More info later. >> >>> The OMG itself did note that using XMI had some issues albeit most >>> of them are probably irrelevant to our purpose since they are >>> concerned with consistent graphical representation. >>> >>> UML cannot be parsed by applications unless it is conveyed in some >>> form of electronic format. >> >> >> >> Recomended Serialization is through using XMI based on the MOF meta >> model for a specific UML version. >> >>> UML itself does not (in the UML specification) constrain the exact >>> format for serialization for items like object persistence, object >>> serialization or interchange. >> >> >> >> The UML "framework" consists of several integrated parts including >> XMI, MOF and a MOF meta model of UML >> >> Here is the MOF meta model for UML >> <http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/01-02-15> >> so this file + XMI principles = a XML schema for transporting UML >> models. >> >> >> /anders >> >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]