Messages

31

Uml Process / Re: Instance of an component?

« on: October 10, 2007, 09:44:19 pm »

Thank you for answering :-)

The association link isn't the problem. My problem is the ownedPort-tag in XMI. I tried to load the XMI with the Eclipse modeling framework and the UML2 project. After modifying the XMI file (without an component instance), so that EMF can load it, I added a component instance. EMF returns a error like:
"Feature 'ownedPort' not valid".
So, I used the UML specification to search for the ownedPort-Association and I think, that the ownedPort-tag is not correct there (because a InstanceSpecification and its supertypes does not have a ownedPort-Association).

Now, I am confused and hope, that the UML 2 specification allows to connect Ports of component objects.

Do you know what I mean?

PS: Yes, I meant 'Bus2'

32

Uml Process / Re: Instance of an component?

« on: October 09, 2007, 10:39:06 pm »

No ideas?  

33

Uml Process / Instance of an component?

« on: October 08, 2007, 01:38:48 am »

Hi,
I created an instance of an component and exported it to XMI 2.1, but I can't find the ownedPort-Association in the UML2-metamodel. The little test szenario looks like this:

The following XMI-Code is generated (without associations):

Code: [Select]

<packagedElement xmi:type="uml:InstanceSpecification" xmi:id="EAID_363FA362_96D3_4421_9D58_803F05EEF70A" name="d2" visibility="public" classifier="EAID_E89BA2F3_9764_43b9_83F0_77B4C46F48D3">
   <ownedPort xmi:type="uml:Port" xmi:id="EAID_20D018ED_0294_4f7f_8C1F_A6C09807380A" name="CAN" visibility="public" aggregation="composite"/>
   <ownedPort xmi:type="uml:Port" xmi:id="EAID_F632B8E9_434C_4c12_A409_38E5E8AB5345" name="FlexRay" visibility="public" aggregation="composite"/>
</packagedElement>

Is it the correct way to model the scenario 'A communicates from his own FlexRay-port over Bus1 with the FlexRay-port of B'?
Are there instances of components in UML2?

Thanks for your help :-)

34

Uml Process / Re: No parameter and attribute types in XMI 2.1?

« on: September 26, 2007, 01:28:32 am »

Do you mean 'I should open a thread an send a nice bug report with a link to the thread to the support' with best practice?
Sry, I haven't found any other big practise :-)

35

Uml Process / Re: No parameter and attribute types in XMI 2.1?

« on: September 24, 2007, 07:30:08 am »

It's from the newest build 817 (released today).
Is it the right forum to open a thread for XMI bugs?

36

Uml Process / No parameter and attribute types in XMI 2.1?

« on: September 24, 2007, 03:37:32 am »

Hi,
I tried to export this little class to XMI 2.1:

This XMI-File was created (extensions are deleted):

Code: [Select]

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<xmi:XMI xmi:version="2.1" xmlns:uml="http://schema.omg.org/spec/UML/2.1" xmlns:xmi="http://schema.omg.org/spec/XMI/2.1">
 <xmi:Documentation exporter="Enterprise Architect" exporterVersion="6.5"/>
 <uml:Model xmi:type="uml:Model" name="EA_Model" visibility="public">
   <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Package" xmi:id="0E386949_8A20" name="Model" visibility="public">
     <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Package" xmi:id="9E7BD7F4_027C" name="Class Model" visibility="public">
       <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Class" xmi:id="179A3583_6AE1" name="$help://classdiagram.htm" visibility="public"/>
       <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Class" xmi:id="29A94BBC_1192_" name="$help://class_model_pattern.htm" visibility="public"/>
       <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Package" xmi:id="B3FA55F1_7650" name="System" visibility="public">
         <packagedElement xmi:type="uml:Class" xmi:id="15CBBC74_D2FD" name="Class1" visibility="public">
           <ownedAttribute xmi:type="uml:Property" xmi:id="E7064343_2190" name="aBooleanVariable" visibility="private"
            isDerived="false">
             <lowerValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger" xmi:id="LI000001_2190" value="1"/>
             <upperValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger" xmi:id="LI000002_2190" value="1"/>
           </ownedAttribute>
           <ownedAttribute xmi:type="uml:Property" xmi:id="4F116335_17B5" name="aDoubleVariable" visibility="private"
            isDerived="false">
             <lowerValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger" xmi:id="LI000003_17B5" value="1"/>
             <upperValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger" xmi:id="LI000004_17B5" value="1"/>
           </ownedAttribute>
           <ownedOperation xmi:id="43BDD403_3700" name="operation1" visibility="public" concurrency="sequential">
             <ownedParameter xmi:id="B948AAF9_124B" name="x" direction="in"/>
             <ownedParameter xmi:id="7E68882C_4CAA" name="y" direction="in"/>
           </ownedOperation>
         </packagedElement>
       </packagedElement>
     </packagedElement>
   </packagedElement>
 </uml:Model>
 <xmi:Extension extender="Enterprise Architect" extenderID="6.5">
   [deleted]
 </xmi:Extension>
</xmi:XMI>


Well, where are the informations about the parameter and attribute types? Is it my failure or doesn't XMI 2.1 store the informations by specification?

The longer I try to export different models to XMI, the more elements and bugs I can find. That's depressing  

Perhaps, it would be a good idea to open a thread to collect all bugs of the XMI-Exporter?

Edit: I reduced the length of the IDs and inserted spaces.

37

Uml Process / Re: Sequence diagram: Condition for all lifelines

« on: September 19, 2007, 10:01:57 pm »

I think so too, but Enterprise architect can only cover one lifeline (snaps to one of them). The other problem:

The OMG UML specification (UML Superstructure Specification, v2.0, p. 414) states:
"A Continuation is a syntactic way to define continuations of different branches of an Alternative CombinedFragment. Continuations is intuitively similar to labels representing intermediate points in a flow of control."

The OMG UML specification (UML Superstructure Specification, v2.0, p. 415) also states:
"Continuations have semantics only in connection with Alternative CombinedFragments and (weak) sequencing. If an InteractionOperand of an Alternative CombinedFragment ends in a Continuation with name (say) X, only InteractionFragments starting with the Continuation X (or no continuation at all) can be appended."

=> The UML specification allows continuations only for CombinedFragments.

38

Uml Process / Re: Sequence diagram: Condition for all lifelines

« on: September 19, 2007, 09:46:22 pm »

I've fixed that for you. It's the crafty mechanism built into the forums to prevent name calling

Thank you

39

Uml Process / Re: Sequence diagram: Condition for all lifelines

« on: September 19, 2007, 09:22:47 pm »

Anyone an idea?

40

Uml Process / Re: Sequence diagram: Condition for all lifelines

« on: September 18, 2007, 05:06:22 am »

Oh, there is a '*' instead of an 'a' in the link. New correct one:
http://www.item.ntnu.no/fag/SIE5020/MSC_HTML-version/02-03_MSC-Basics/02-03-04-CoregionSubmessage/exercise1.gif

Perhaps, the picture helps you to understand my problem ;-)

PS: The forum seems to replace the first 'a' with an '*'.

41

Uml Process / Re: Sequence diagram: Condition for all lifelines

« on: September 18, 2007, 02:17:35 am »

I don't mean a set of state invariants.
Perhaps, a example helps to demonstrate my prob:
I have three objects for devices, every device having its own states (Ready, Failure, ...). And there is the complete system with all devices and a global state (Global_Ready, ...).

To add the StateInvariant over one lifeline can be missunderstood, a condition over all lifelines would be easier to understand.

Another example:
http://www.item.ntnu.no/fag/SIE5020/MSC_HTML-version/02-03_MSC-Basics/02-03-04-CoregionSubmessage/exercise1.gif
The instances X,Y,Z must be 'Idle', after sending some messages they must be 'Idle' too (for example for test specification).

42

Uml Process / Sequence diagram: Condition for all lifelines

« on: September 18, 2007, 12:26:30 am »

Hi,
i am searching for a way to define a condition for all lifelines at ones (it's a global state). The StateInvariant covers only one lifeline, so I have to resize it to cover more than one lifeline. The problem is, that the XMI-Exporter does not save all covered lifelines (UML says, that a StateInvariant only have one covered lifeline).

Is there an other way to add a condition, that covers all lifelines?

43

Uml Process / Re: Sequence diagram: How can I add a diagram refe

« on: September 14, 2007, 04:47:22 am »

I am using the newest build, 816.

44

Uml Process / Sequence diagram: How can I add a diagram referenc

« on: September 13, 2007, 11:08:14 pm »

Hi,
I am trying to add a diagram reference and export it to XMI. But it does not work very well
My little test has two sequence diagrams:


After exporting it to XMI, the order of the messages is completely disarranged.

Is it a bug or is there something wrong on the diagram or the use of the diagram reference?

45

Uml Process / Re: How can I add an assignment in a sequence diag

« on: September 12, 2007, 11:11:36 pm »

Thank you for the good idea, but it's a model for an embedded system. I am sending signals instead of calling methodes. A setter isn't the right thing, because it isn't object oriented.
Do you have an other nice idea?