| Different validation results due to cardinality [message #1831332] |
Mon, 17 August 2020 15:14 |
 Lars-Ola Osterlund
Messages: 2
Registered: August 2020 |
Junior Member |
|
|
In the CIM information model (see IEC 61970) there is an association between two classes Terminal [1] and [0..1] RegulatingControl. A RegulatingControl is required to have a Terminal but a Terminal may be without a RegulatingControl. Both ends of the association are present in the Ecore file.
When I validate a model with RegulatingControls without a Terminal this is reported as expected.
If I want to allow more RegulatingControls at a Terminal I change the cardinality at the RegulatingControl side from [0..1] to [0..*]. After this the RegulatingControls without Terminal aren't reported any longer. Changing back the RegulatingControl side cardinality to [0..1] makes the RegulatingControls without Terminal reported again.
I don't understand this, is it me making a mistake or is the validation engine not working properly?
Thankful for help.
Br / Lars-Ola
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02709 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
