|
Re: SysML SubModel problems [message #1816621 is a reply to message #1816617] |
Fri, 01 November 2019 16:38 |
|
Hi Philip,
splitted SysML14 models with Papyrus work perfectly for me.
But I use model elements instead package elements to explicitly indicate these are independent models. But that should not matter at all.
I created a small demo on the configuration (SysML14 1.3.2, on Papyrus 4.5) you mentioned.
The model is structured according to OMG UAF (Unified Architecture Framework) which implements ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011, Systems and software engineering Architecture Description.
Please feel free to import that demo via Import --> Existing Projects into Workspace.
Best regards
Carsten
EDIT typo
[Updated on: Fri, 01 November 2019 16:40] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: SysML SubModel problems [message #1816912 is a reply to message #1816866] |
Mon, 11 November 2019 17:13 |
|
Hi Philip,
you can avoid the bahavior by providing an own project for each model and reference between models using the package import mechanism. I attached an example to show this looks like.
I prefer this way, because it makes each model a configuration item, I assume, as AP233 guy (aren't you) you also prefer this way ;-)
BTW, I currently prepare a paper on modeling in large I plan to publish on https://modeling-languages.com/. It ressembles my experiences of the last 22+ years. Including on how to deal with 60 million requirements. I try to explain thing as brief as possible. But nevertheless currently it is 18 pages, with 13 empty chapters still waiting for content. It gets a tour de force ;-)
/Carsten
-
Attachment: Example.zip
(Size: 10.23KB, Downloaded 76 times)
|
|
|
|
Re: SysML SubModel problems [message #1818044 is a reply to message #1818033] |
Wed, 04 December 2019 17:15 |
|
Hi Philip,
AP239.org makes me laugh. When I started to design a S1000D based documentation system 2 decades ago, the S1000D already was version 1.6 and the first drafts of the XML based S1000D version 2.x were out. And AP239.org states S1000D as tomorrow specification :-)
BTW, the IETP-X is still in use ;-)
/Carsten
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02901 seconds