Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » UML2 » Internal ordering of interaction fragments in a sequence diagram
Internal ordering of interaction fragments in a sequence diagram [message #478312] Tue, 21 April 2009 07:34 Go to next message
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by: florianwendland.freenet.de

Hey you,

after reading the relevant sections in the uml spec, i found out, that
the ordering of interaction fragments in an interaction results only
from their physical representation in the containment tree?! First, i
can't imagine, that there is no ordering mechanism (except of
GeneralOrdering, which is responsible for the partial ordering of
occurrences), but it seems to me, that it is so?!

But, is that really the best way to represent semenatic of an interaction?

Marc-Florian Wendland
Re: Internal ordering of interaction fragments in a sequence diagram [message #478317 is a reply to message #478312] Wed, 22 April 2009 16:35 Go to previous message
james bruck is currently offline james bruckFriend
Messages: 1724
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Yes I believe that what you have described is accurate. The lists in
question are marked as "ordered".
You can raise issues with the UML spec by going to www.omg.org.

- James.

"Marc-Florian Wendland" <florianwendland@freenet.de> wrote in message
news:gsjsnq$shl$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hey you,
>
> after reading the relevant sections in the uml spec, i found out, that the
> ordering of interaction fragments in an interaction results only from
> their physical representation in the containment tree?! First, i can't
> imagine, that there is no ordering mechanism (except of GeneralOrdering,
> which is responsible for the partial ordering of occurrences), but it
> seems to me, that it is so?!
>
> But, is that really the best way to represent semenatic of an interaction?
>
> Marc-Florian Wendland
Re: Internal ordering of interaction fragments in a sequence diagram [message #627507 is a reply to message #478312] Wed, 22 April 2009 16:35 Go to previous message
james bruck is currently offline james bruckFriend
Messages: 1724
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Yes I believe that what you have described is accurate. The lists in
question are marked as "ordered".
You can raise issues with the UML spec by going to www.omg.org.

- James.

"Marc-Florian Wendland" <florianwendland@freenet.de> wrote in message
news:gsjsnq$shl$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Hey you,
>
> after reading the relevant sections in the uml spec, i found out, that the
> ordering of interaction fragments in an interaction results only from
> their physical representation in the containment tree?! First, i can't
> imagine, that there is no ordering mechanism (except of GeneralOrdering,
> which is responsible for the partial ordering of occurrences), but it
> seems to me, that it is so?!
>
> But, is that really the best way to represent semenatic of an interaction?
>
> Marc-Florian Wendland
Previous Topic:Sequence diagram profile
Next Topic:Multiple Inheritance: select which Impl java class will be used as superclass
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Jan 21 07:01:36 GMT 2018

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01683 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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