Home » Modeling » UML2 » In profile, In Ecore represention of the profile why do we have an eannotation UML (source = http://
|
| Re: In profile, In Ecore represention of the profile why do we have an eannotation UML (source = htt [message #536487 is a reply to message #536450] |
Fri, 28 May 2010 13:07   |
|
Hi, Tristan,
These annotations are the traceability references from EClasses to the
Stereotypes that they represent (and from which they were generated).
This is how the UML API knows of which Stereotype an EObject
("stereotype application") in your model is an instance. It might have
been sufficient just to infer the Stereotype by the EClass name in most
cases, but I think the profile definition may need to alter EClass names
to conform to EMF's naming rules for stereotypes that don't adhere to
those rules.
Regarding the annotation source URI: there is no need for it to be
related to the metamodel's namespace URI. It is simply a tag that
identifies the annotation as being defined by UML2. Neither the
structure nor the value of the EAnnotation source has any meaning to
EMF, although many do seem by convention to use a URI structure. When
the annotation and/or Ecore definition semantics were last changed by
the UML2 project, this URI happened to be the current metamodel version.
Now, it isn't any longer, but changing this annotation source would
require migration of artifacts for no particular benefit.
HTH,
Christian
On 28/05/10 06:14 AM, Tristan FAURE wrote:
> Hi i've created a UML profile.
> After checking the ecore representation of the profile (after define
> action).
> I was suprises to find an eannotation UML with references including my
> stereotype and source referencing http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML
>
> What is the goal of this annotation. Why the version number is
> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML and not
> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/3.0.0/UML ?
>
> Regards
> Tristan FAURE
|
|
|
| Re: In profile, In Ecore represention of the profile why do we have an eannotation UML (source = htt [message #536493 is a reply to message #536487] |
Fri, 28 May 2010 13:32 |
 Tristan Faure
Messages: 460
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Christian !
Thank you for your answer. My question was answer to reassure me about
meta model evolution :)
Thank you very much
Tristan
Le 28/05/2010 15:07, Christian W. Damus a écrit :
> Hi, Tristan,
>
> These annotations are the traceability references from EClasses to the
> Stereotypes that they represent (and from which they were generated).
> This is how the UML API knows of which Stereotype an EObject
> ("stereotype application") in your model is an instance. It might
> have been sufficient just to infer the Stereotype by the EClass name
> in most cases, but I think the profile definition may need to alter
> EClass names to conform to EMF's naming rules for stereotypes that
> don't adhere to those rules.
>
> Regarding the annotation source URI: there is no need for it to be
> related to the metamodel's namespace URI. It is simply a tag that
> identifies the annotation as being defined by UML2. Neither the
> structure nor the value of the EAnnotation source has any meaning to
> EMF, although many do seem by convention to use a URI structure. When
> the annotation and/or Ecore definition semantics were last changed by
> the UML2 project, this URI happened to be the current metamodel
> version. Now, it isn't any longer, but changing this annotation
> source would require migration of artifacts for no particular benefit.
>
> HTH,
>
> Christian
>
> On 28/05/10 06:14 AM, Tristan FAURE wrote:
>> Hi i've created a UML profile.
>> After checking the ecore representation of the profile (after define
>> action).
>> I was suprises to find an eannotation UML with references including my
>> stereotype and source referencing http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML
>>
>> What is the goal of this annotation. Why the version number is
>> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML and not
>> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/3.0.0/UML ?
>>
>> Regards
>> Tristan FAURE
>
|
|
| |
| Re: In profile, In Ecore represention of the profile why do we have an eannotation UML (source = htt [message #628472 is a reply to message #536450] |
Fri, 28 May 2010 13:07 |
|
Hi, Tristan,
These annotations are the traceability references from EClasses to the
Stereotypes that they represent (and from which they were generated).
This is how the UML API knows of which Stereotype an EObject
("stereotype application") in your model is an instance. It might have
been sufficient just to infer the Stereotype by the EClass name in most
cases, but I think the profile definition may need to alter EClass names
to conform to EMF's naming rules for stereotypes that don't adhere to
those rules.
Regarding the annotation source URI: there is no need for it to be
related to the metamodel's namespace URI. It is simply a tag that
identifies the annotation as being defined by UML2. Neither the
structure nor the value of the EAnnotation source has any meaning to
EMF, although many do seem by convention to use a URI structure. When
the annotation and/or Ecore definition semantics were last changed by
the UML2 project, this URI happened to be the current metamodel version.
Now, it isn't any longer, but changing this annotation source would
require migration of artifacts for no particular benefit.
HTH,
Christian
On 28/05/10 06:14 AM, Tristan FAURE wrote:
> Hi i've created a UML profile.
> After checking the ecore representation of the profile (after define
> action).
> I was suprises to find an eannotation UML with references including my
> stereotype and source referencing http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML
>
> What is the goal of this annotation. Why the version number is
> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML and not
> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/3.0.0/UML ?
>
> Regards
> Tristan FAURE
|
|
|
| Re: In profile, In Ecore represention of the profile why do we have an eannotation UML (source = htt [message #628473 is a reply to message #536487] |
Fri, 28 May 2010 13:32 |
Tristan Faure
Messages: 460
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Christian !
Thank you for your answer. My question was answer to reassure me about
meta model evolution :)
Thank you very much
Tristan
Le 28/05/2010 15:07, Christian W. Damus a écrit :
> Hi, Tristan,
>
> These annotations are the traceability references from EClasses to the
> Stereotypes that they represent (and from which they were generated).
> This is how the UML API knows of which Stereotype an EObject
> ("stereotype application") in your model is an instance. It might
> have been sufficient just to infer the Stereotype by the EClass name
> in most cases, but I think the profile definition may need to alter
> EClass names to conform to EMF's naming rules for stereotypes that
> don't adhere to those rules.
>
> Regarding the annotation source URI: there is no need for it to be
> related to the metamodel's namespace URI. It is simply a tag that
> identifies the annotation as being defined by UML2. Neither the
> structure nor the value of the EAnnotation source has any meaning to
> EMF, although many do seem by convention to use a URI structure. When
> the annotation and/or Ecore definition semantics were last changed by
> the UML2 project, this URI happened to be the current metamodel
> version. Now, it isn't any longer, but changing this annotation
> source would require migration of artifacts for no particular benefit.
>
> HTH,
>
> Christian
>
> On 28/05/10 06:14 AM, Tristan FAURE wrote:
>> Hi i've created a UML profile.
>> After checking the ecore representation of the profile (after define
>> action).
>> I was suprises to find an eannotation UML with references including my
>> stereotype and source referencing http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML
>>
>> What is the goal of this annotation. Why the version number is
>> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/2.0.0/UML and not
>> http://www.eclipse.org/uml2/3.0.0/UML ?
>>
>> Regards
>> Tristan FAURE
>
|
|
| |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 08:13:39 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02354 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
