Skip to main content

Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » UML2 » InstanceSpecification whose classifier is an activity, why not?
InstanceSpecification whose classifier is an activity, why not? [message #626924] Tue, 16 September 2008 14:10
Eclipse UserFriend
Originally posted by:


I am analysing different possibilities to map a Simulink model to a UML
activity model with appropriate lightweight extensions. I am using the
Eclipse UML2 Project to program the implementation of this Simulink-UML

I am confronted with the problem of wanting to link actions with
instances of activities and not directly with activities. So instead of
a callBehaviorAction, a callBehaviorInstanceAction would be great :-)
The activities which are called from the actions share the same
properties, so it would be practical to have on one hand a library of
activities and on the other instanceSpecifications of activities,
similar to classes and instanceSpecifications of classes. Surprisingly,
I have not yet seen examples of activity instances. Although, following
the specification, Activity (from BasicActivities) extends Class (from
Kernel), so in theory, instances could also have as classifier an
activity. The Simulink concept of a library of blocks (in UML:
activities) and instances of blocks in a model (in UML: actions
referring to activity instances) could then be described in UML. As a
current solution, I intend to add a stereotype to the
callBehaviorAction, which will refer to the instanceSpecification of the

Any comments or other propositions are very welcome.

Best regards,
Previous Topic:UML2 migration
Next Topic:InstanceSpecification whose classifier is an activity, why not?
Goto Forum:

Current Time: Fri Aug 19 02:30:12 GMT 2022

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01899 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

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

Back to the top