Skip to main content


Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » UML2 » Relationship between UML and a custom model
Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #477818] Tue, 14 October 2008 09:57 Go to next message
Timothy Marc is currently offline Timothy MarcFriend
Messages: 547
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi all,

one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own model. I
merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure into my own
model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a package foundation,
which takes all the elements from the Kernel package. Now, i have a more
conceptual, theoretically question:

When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it sufficient
to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model into my XModel?
Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel and
XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality of them
are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a conceptual way,
because the are defined in different model scopes, aren't they?

Thx
Timothy
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #477819 is a reply to message #477818] Tue, 14 October 2008 14:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marco Mosconi is currently offline Marco MosconiFriend
Messages: 60
Registered: July 2009
Member
hi,

the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.

Marco

Timothy Marc schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own model. I
> merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure into my own
> model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a package foundation,
> which takes all the elements from the Kernel package. Now, i have a more
> conceptual, theoretically question:
>
> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it sufficient
> to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model into my XModel?
> Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel and
> XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality of them
> are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a conceptual way,
> because the are defined in different model scopes, aren't they?
>
> Thx
> Timothy
>
>
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #477823 is a reply to message #477819] Tue, 14 October 2008 17:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Timothy Marc is currently offline Timothy MarcFriend
Messages: 547
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi,

yes, that's clear. Let's assume, that i want to copy only elements from the
kernel package, for example, a package with classes inside. Are they still
compatible or does they only have identical naes, but are logical disjoint?

Thx
"Marco Mosconi" <mosconi@cs.tu-berlin.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:gd2an6$9qm$1@build.eclipse.org...
> hi,
>
> the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
> merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
> package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
> present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.
>
> Marco
>
> Timothy Marc schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own model.
>> I merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure into my own
>> model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a package
>> foundation, which takes all the elements from the Kernel package. Now, i
>> have a more conceptual, theoretically question:
>>
>> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it
>> sufficient to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model
>> into my XModel? Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel
>> and XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality
>> of them are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a
>> conceptual way, because the are defined in different model scopes, aren't
>> they?
>>
>> Thx
>> Timothy
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #477826 is a reply to message #477823] Tue, 14 October 2008 20:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kenn Hussey is currently offline Kenn HusseyFriend
Messages: 1620
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Tomothy,

You're right, there's no explicit relationship between the merged results.
The original idea was that the two versions of "Class" could be treated in a
similar way by a tool if one namespace were mapped in some way (e.g. by
using a schemaLocation attribute) to the other; the assumption was that
tools could process features (XML elements and attributes) that they
recognized and simply ignore ones they didn't. But there seems to be some
interest of late (even within the OMG) in understanding the heritage of a
given merged element and using that information to determine the
"compatibility" of different "flavours" of the same class...

Kenn

"Timothy Marc" <timothymarc@freenet.de> wrote in message
news:gd2lfv$7n8$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi,
>
> yes, that's clear. Let's assume, that i want to copy only elements from
> the kernel package, for example, a package with classes inside. Are they
> still compatible or does they only have identical naes, but are logical
> disjoint?
>
> Thx
> "Marco Mosconi" <mosconi@cs.tu-berlin.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:gd2an6$9qm$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> hi,
>>
>> the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
>> merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
>> package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
>> present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.
>>
>> Marco
>>
>> Timothy Marc schrieb:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own
>>> model. I merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure
>>> into my own model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a
>>> package foundation, which takes all the elements from the Kernel
>>> package. Now, i have a more conceptual, theoretically question:
>>>
>>> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it
>>> sufficient to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model
>>> into my XModel? Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel
>>> and XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality
>>> of them are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a
>>> conceptual way, because the are defined in different model scopes,
>>> aren't they?
>>>
>>> Thx
>>> Timothy
>
>
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #477827 is a reply to message #477826] Tue, 14 October 2008 20:31 Go to previous message
Kenn Hussey is currently offline Kenn HusseyFriend
Messages: 1620
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Oops, sorry for the typo in your name, Timothy. :(

"Kenn Hussey" <Kenn.Hussey@embarcadero.com> wrote in message
news:gd2vhn$he0$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Tomothy,
>
> You're right, there's no explicit relationship between the merged results.
> The original idea was that the two versions of "Class" could be treated in
> a similar way by a tool if one namespace were mapped in some way (e.g. by
> using a schemaLocation attribute) to the other; the assumption was that
> tools could process features (XML elements and attributes) that they
> recognized and simply ignore ones they didn't. But there seems to be some
> interest of late (even within the OMG) in understanding the heritage of a
> given merged element and using that information to determine the
> "compatibility" of different "flavours" of the same class...
>
> Kenn
>
> "Timothy Marc" <timothymarc@freenet.de> wrote in message
> news:gd2lfv$7n8$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Hi,
>>
>> yes, that's clear. Let's assume, that i want to copy only elements from
>> the kernel package, for example, a package with classes inside. Are they
>> still compatible or does they only have identical naes, but are logical
>> disjoint?
>>
>> Thx
>> "Marco Mosconi" <mosconi@cs.tu-berlin.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:gd2an6$9qm$1@build.eclipse.org...
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
>>> merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
>>> package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
>>> present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.
>>>
>>> Marco
>>>
>>> Timothy Marc schrieb:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own
>>>> model. I merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure
>>>> into my own model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a
>>>> package foundation, which takes all the elements from the Kernel
>>>> package. Now, i have a more conceptual, theoretically question:
>>>>
>>>> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it
>>>> sufficient to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model
>>>> into my XModel? Or more precisly, how do the elements in the
>>>> UML::kernel and XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they
>>>> only mutuality of them are their names. They are not compareable to
>>>> each other in a conceptual way, because the are defined in different
>>>> model scopes, aren't they?
>>>>
>>>> Thx
>>>> Timothy
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #627023 is a reply to message #477818] Tue, 14 October 2008 14:35 Go to previous message
Marco Mosconi is currently offline Marco MosconiFriend
Messages: 60
Registered: July 2009
Member
hi,

the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.

Marco

Timothy Marc schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own model. I
> merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure into my own
> model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a package foundation,
> which takes all the elements from the Kernel package. Now, i have a more
> conceptual, theoretically question:
>
> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it sufficient
> to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model into my XModel?
> Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel and
> XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality of them
> are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a conceptual way,
> because the are defined in different model scopes, aren't they?
>
> Thx
> Timothy
>
>
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #627028 is a reply to message #477819] Tue, 14 October 2008 17:41 Go to previous message
Timothy Marc is currently offline Timothy MarcFriend
Messages: 547
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi,

yes, that's clear. Let's assume, that i want to copy only elements from the
kernel package, for example, a package with classes inside. Are they still
compatible or does they only have identical naes, but are logical disjoint?

Thx
"Marco Mosconi" <mosconi@cs.tu-berlin.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:gd2an6$9qm$1@build.eclipse.org...
> hi,
>
> the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
> merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
> package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
> present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.
>
> Marco
>
> Timothy Marc schrieb:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own model.
>> I merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure into my own
>> model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a package
>> foundation, which takes all the elements from the Kernel package. Now, i
>> have a more conceptual, theoretically question:
>>
>> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it
>> sufficient to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model
>> into my XModel? Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel
>> and XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality
>> of them are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a
>> conceptual way, because the are defined in different model scopes, aren't
>> they?
>>
>> Thx
>> Timothy
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #627031 is a reply to message #477823] Tue, 14 October 2008 20:30 Go to previous message
Kenn Hussey is currently offline Kenn HusseyFriend
Messages: 1620
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Tomothy,

You're right, there's no explicit relationship between the merged results.
The original idea was that the two versions of "Class" could be treated in a
similar way by a tool if one namespace were mapped in some way (e.g. by
using a schemaLocation attribute) to the other; the assumption was that
tools could process features (XML elements and attributes) that they
recognized and simply ignore ones they didn't. But there seems to be some
interest of late (even within the OMG) in understanding the heritage of a
given merged element and using that information to determine the
"compatibility" of different "flavours" of the same class...

Kenn

"Timothy Marc" <timothymarc@freenet.de> wrote in message
news:gd2lfv$7n8$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hi,
>
> yes, that's clear. Let's assume, that i want to copy only elements from
> the kernel package, for example, a package with classes inside. Are they
> still compatible or does they only have identical naes, but are logical
> disjoint?
>
> Thx
> "Marco Mosconi" <mosconi@cs.tu-berlin.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:gd2an6$9qm$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> hi,
>>
>> the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
>> merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
>> package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
>> present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.
>>
>> Marco
>>
>> Timothy Marc schrieb:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own
>>> model. I merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure
>>> into my own model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a
>>> package foundation, which takes all the elements from the Kernel
>>> package. Now, i have a more conceptual, theoretically question:
>>>
>>> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it
>>> sufficient to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model
>>> into my XModel? Or more precisly, how do the elements in the UML::kernel
>>> and XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they only mutuality
>>> of them are their names. They are not compareable to each other in a
>>> conceptual way, because the are defined in different model scopes,
>>> aren't they?
>>>
>>> Thx
>>> Timothy
>
>
Re: Relationship between UML and a custom model [message #627032 is a reply to message #477826] Tue, 14 October 2008 20:31 Go to previous message
Kenn Hussey is currently offline Kenn HusseyFriend
Messages: 1620
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Oops, sorry for the typo in your name, Timothy. :(

"Kenn Hussey" <Kenn.Hussey@embarcadero.com> wrote in message
news:gd2vhn$he0$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Tomothy,
>
> You're right, there's no explicit relationship between the merged results.
> The original idea was that the two versions of "Class" could be treated in
> a similar way by a tool if one namespace were mapped in some way (e.g. by
> using a schemaLocation attribute) to the other; the assumption was that
> tools could process features (XML elements and attributes) that they
> recognized and simply ignore ones they didn't. But there seems to be some
> interest of late (even within the OMG) in understanding the heritage of a
> given merged element and using that information to determine the
> "compatibility" of different "flavours" of the same class...
>
> Kenn
>
> "Timothy Marc" <timothymarc@freenet.de> wrote in message
> news:gd2lfv$7n8$1@build.eclipse.org...
>> Hi,
>>
>> yes, that's clear. Let's assume, that i want to copy only elements from
>> the kernel package, for example, a package with classes inside. Are they
>> still compatible or does they only have identical naes, but are logical
>> disjoint?
>>
>> Thx
>> "Marco Mosconi" <mosconi@cs.tu-berlin.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:gd2an6$9qm$1@build.eclipse.org...
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> the problem in this case would be that the *.uml model is based on the
>>> merge product of the whole UML superstructure, and not only the kernel
>>> package. Thus, such a .uml model may contain information that is not
>>> present in your merged subset and/or be incompatible with it.
>>>
>>> Marco
>>>
>>> Timothy Marc schrieb:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> one question concerning the relationship between an UML and my own
>>>> model. I merged the whole kernel package from the UML Superstructure
>>>> into my own model, let's call it XModel. In that XModel i defined a
>>>> package foundation, which takes all the elements from the Kernel
>>>> package. Now, i have a more conceptual, theoretically question:
>>>>
>>>> When i want to transform a uml class model into my XModel, is it
>>>> sufficient to copy the parts of the containment tree from the uml model
>>>> into my XModel? Or more precisly, how do the elements in the
>>>> UML::kernel and XModel::foundation relates to each other? IMHO, they
>>>> only mutuality of them are their names. They are not compareable to
>>>> each other in a conceptual way, because the are defined in different
>>>> model scopes, aren't they?
>>>>
>>>> Thx
>>>> Timothy
>>
>>
>
>
Previous Topic:Main intention of PackageMerge
Next Topic:Re: allOwnedElements() omits StructuredActivity's children
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Apr 05 23:58:41 GMT 2020

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02292 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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

Back to the top