Stereotype is not shown in the correct toolbox page

[Geert Bellekens]

Details:

I have defined my own diagram type and toolbox.
Then I defined a view specification extending my diagram, that exposes certain stereotypes.
For the most part this works fine, except for one connector stereotype: ArchiMate3::ArchiMate_Realization
All stereotypes show up in the toolbox page I had defined for them, except for the Realization. That comes up in the toolbox page with the name of my view specifications (as if I didn't add it to a toolbox page)

Steps to reproduce
- Import the attached MDG technology file
- Create a new diagram of type Architecture::Solution Context Viewpoint
- Notice the Realization in the toolbox page Solution Context Viewpoint (instead of the toolbox page Structural Relationships"

Reported

Did anyone encounter this issues and know a solution?

Geert

[Geert Bellekens]

I found the issue. I had defined the toolbox item as
- ArchiMate_Realization(UML::Realization)
But in after looking in the MDG technology for ArchiMate 3, I found that the stereotype ArchiMate_Realization was actually an extension of UML Dependency, and not of UML Realization.
After changing my toolbox item definition to
- ArchiMate_Realization(UML::Dependency)
The problem was solved.

Geert

[Paolo F Cantoni]

I found the issue. I had defined the toolbox item as
- ArchiMate_Realization(UML::Realization)
But in after looking in the MDG technology for ArchiMate 3, I found that the stereotype ArchiMate_Realization was actually an extension of UML Dependency, and not of UML Realization.
After changing my toolbox item definition to
- ArchiMate_Realization(UML::Dependency)
The problem was solved.

Geert

Yes, I've been caught by that kind of "discrepancy" before.  Can you see any rationale for this?  (not blaming Sparx, just observing anomaly in the standard)

Paolo

[Geert Bellekens]

Yes, I've been caught by that kind of "discrepancy" before.  Can you see any rationale for this?  (not blaming Sparx, just observing anomaly in the standard)

Paolo

Not really. The weird thing was that it worked perfectly as a toolbox item, so there was no reason to suspect it was defined wrong.
Usually if you type half a comma wrong in the MDG game, it doesn't work at all (without telling you the reason of course)

Geert

[Viking]

Yes, I've been caught by that kind of "discrepancy" before.  Can you see any rationale for this?  (not blaming Sparx, just observing anomaly in the standard)
Paolo

I am not the expert, but the reason could be that "Dependency" is a "Type" and "Realization" a "Subtype".