Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » UML2 » No value in upperValue/lowerValue - meaning?
No value in upperValue/lowerValue - meaning? [message #474721] Wed, 25 July 2007 13:57 Go to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: user.domain.invalid

Dear All,

I am just finishing off my XSLT for the compare tool & wrt
cardinalities/multiplicities I am stuck for some exact wording.

Basically is I run into a change etc in a multiplicity e.g.

<upperValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralUnlimitedNatural"
xmi:id="_WC4sUTqoEdyMeJ3mr5tnmg" value="1"/>

Then I can grab the value attribute & say "value =".

However if the value is the default it is not put in e.g.

<lowerValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger"
xmi:id="_WC4sUDqoEdyMeJ3mr5tnmg"/>

So what would the the "UML correct" wording for when an upper or lower
value has no value?

Default? No Value?


TIA


Adam
Re: No value in upperValue/lowerValue - meaning? [message #474723 is a reply to message #474721] Wed, 25 July 2007 20:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
james bruck is currently offline james bruckFriend
Messages: 1724
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
When the value of LiteralInteger is not serialized it would assume the
default value.

It appears that the default value for LiteralInteger is 0.
See section 7.3.27 of the UML spec and the implementation at
LiteralIntegerImpl VALUE_EDEFAULT.

- James.


"AdamF" <user@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:f87kt1$nf5$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Dear All,
>
> I am just finishing off my XSLT for the compare tool & wrt
> cardinalities/multiplicities I am stuck for some exact wording.
>
> Basically is I run into a change etc in a multiplicity e.g.
>
> <upperValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralUnlimitedNatural"
> xmi:id="_WC4sUTqoEdyMeJ3mr5tnmg" value="1"/>
>
> Then I can grab the value attribute & say "value =".
>
> However if the value is the default it is not put in e.g.
>
> <lowerValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger"
> xmi:id="_WC4sUDqoEdyMeJ3mr5tnmg"/>
>
> So what would the the "UML correct" wording for when an upper or lower
> value has no value?
>
> Default? No Value?
>
>
> TIA
>
>
> Adam
Re: No value in upperValue/lowerValue - meaning? [message #474725 is a reply to message #474723] Thu, 26 July 2007 10:07 Go to previous message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: user.domain.invalid

James Bruck wrote:
> When the value of LiteralInteger is not serialized it would assume the
> default value.
>
> It appears that the default value for LiteralInteger is 0.
> See section 7.3.27 of the UML spec and the implementation at
> LiteralIntegerImpl VALUE_EDEFAULT.
>
> - James.
>
Thanks.

I will use "default value".



Adam
Re: No value in upperValue/lowerValue - meaning? [message #624058 is a reply to message #474721] Wed, 25 July 2007 20:42 Go to previous message
james bruck is currently offline james bruckFriend
Messages: 1724
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
When the value of LiteralInteger is not serialized it would assume the
default value.

It appears that the default value for LiteralInteger is 0.
See section 7.3.27 of the UML spec and the implementation at
LiteralIntegerImpl VALUE_EDEFAULT.

- James.


"AdamF" <user@domain.invalid> wrote in message
news:f87kt1$nf5$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Dear All,
>
> I am just finishing off my XSLT for the compare tool & wrt
> cardinalities/multiplicities I am stuck for some exact wording.
>
> Basically is I run into a change etc in a multiplicity e.g.
>
> <upperValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralUnlimitedNatural"
> xmi:id="_WC4sUTqoEdyMeJ3mr5tnmg" value="1"/>
>
> Then I can grab the value attribute & say "value =".
>
> However if the value is the default it is not put in e.g.
>
> <lowerValue xmi:type="uml:LiteralInteger"
> xmi:id="_WC4sUDqoEdyMeJ3mr5tnmg"/>
>
> So what would the the "UML correct" wording for when an upper or lower
> value has no value?
>
> Default? No Value?
>
>
> TIA
>
>
> Adam
Re: No value in upperValue/lowerValue - meaning? [message #624060 is a reply to message #474723] Thu, 26 July 2007 10:07 Go to previous message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: user.domain.invalid

James Bruck wrote:
> When the value of LiteralInteger is not serialized it would assume the
> default value.
>
> It appears that the default value for LiteralInteger is 0.
> See section 7.3.27 of the UML spec and the implementation at
> LiteralIntegerImpl VALUE_EDEFAULT.
>
> - James.
>
Thanks.

I will use "default value".



Adam
Previous Topic:preconditions / postconditions of a use case
Next Topic:How to add a SendOperationEvent to a Package?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Nov 25 09:53:19 GMT 2017

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02440 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software