No parameter and attribute types in XMI 2.1?

[MrDX]

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.

[«Midnight»]

I like your idea about creating a thread to capture this bug list in this area. Some time ago Paolo et al did so, and they worked with Sparx to resolve quite a few bugs in this area.

Since then EA 7.0 has come along, and the bug list seems to be growing a bit.

David

NB: Just in case, try your export with build 817; there seem to be a few XMI corrections there.

[MrDX]

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

[«Midnight»]

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

OK, so this is a real problem. As I said earlier, I support your idea of starting such a thread.

This is an OK spot. Perhaps a better spot would be the Suggestions and Requests section.

Please search my recent posts for a best practice we use for bug reports and feature requests. Try to find either, the practice is the same.

Meanwhile, if you want to copy and move your thread to the other section, I'll copy my posts there, and delete them from this thread.

Alternatively, you can paste a link to this thread.

Over to you,
David

[MrDX]

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 :-)

[«Midnight»]

Yes, that's exactly right.

I've decided to try to write it in detail less often.

Thanks for looking it up.

David

And yes, some form of FAQ section has already been suggested, again and again...