| UML 1.4 (or UML 1.5) to UML 2.1.x? [message #93524] |
Tue, 28 October 2008 15:22  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Is there a UML 1.4 to UML 2.1.2 (or any close variant of UML 2.x)
transformation available for ATL? In the pre-Eclipse days, ATL included
support for NetBeans MDR. Is this still included (or is there another
way to read MOF 1.4 based models)?
There was a previous query about MDR
(news://news.eclipse.org:119/fsg6ur$nja$1@build.eclipse.org), but either
it's a typo for MDL (as in Rose Petal file) or it means something else
in this context.
I did look through the ATL transformation zoo, but wasn't able to spot
anything which looked relevant. (As an aside, it would be useful if the
descriptions of the UML transformations included what version of UML
they worked with).
Tom
|
|
|
| Re: UML 1.4 (or UML 1.5) to UML 2.1.x? [message #93778 is a reply to message #93524] |
Wed, 29 October 2008 10:11  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
As far as i know; ATL CVS still contains a MDR project, which needs extra
libraries.
In the zoo i found this relkated transformation:
http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/atlTransformations/#UMLCopyMo del
Regards,
Alfons
"Tom Morris" <tfmorris@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:ge7oq3$7du$1@build.eclipse.org...
> Is there a UML 1.4 to UML 2.1.2 (or any close variant of UML 2.x)
> transformation available for ATL? In the pre-Eclipse days, ATL included
> support for NetBeans MDR. Is this still included (or is there another way
> to read MOF 1.4 based models)?
>
> There was a previous query about MDR
> (news://news.eclipse.org:119/fsg6ur$nja$1@build.eclipse.org), but either
> it's a typo for MDL (as in Rose Petal file) or it means something else in
> this context.
>
> I did look through the ATL transformation zoo, but wasn't able to spot
> anything which looked relevant. (As an aside, it would be useful if the
> descriptions of the UML transformations included what version of UML they
> worked with).
>
> Tom
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03526 seconds
Home