Issue 4126: specifications of multiplicity and other semantics in UML diagram normative (bqs-ftf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: This AB member asked the author during the AB meeting whether the UML
diagram is intended to be normative.  For example, multiplicities on
references are 0..1 in some cases and 1 in other cases, indicating in the
former cases that a null value is acceptable and in the latter cases that a
null value is not acceptable.  The question is whether the author intended
such specifications of multiplicity and other semantics in the UML diagram
to be normative.  The author answered that they are intended to be
normative.  However, the document calls the diagram "illustrative."

Resolution: see below
Revised Text: Close the issue without any changes. 
However, on suggestion of Scott Markel, the following explanatory text was added to the chapter 2.1.4 "Illustrative UML diagram": 

The UML in this specification is illustrative, not normative.
Actions taken:
December 18, 2000: received issue
May 13, 2002: closed issue
Discussion: 
PROPOSAL

If in fact the semantics in the UML diagram are supposed to be normative,
the specification should say so clearly. The author was wrong. The UML was, indeed, intended to be illustrative. The normative is only IDL. However, and this was the author's intention, when exporting citations in the XML form, and if the repository does not provide its own XML model (a DTD), then the UML diagram shown in the spec should be taken and an appropriate XMI generated and used normatively

End of Annotations:=====
ISSUE

This AB member asked the author during the AB meeting whether the UML
diagram is intended to be normative.  For example, multiplicities on
references are 0..1 in some cases and 1 in other cases, indicating in
the
former cases that a null value is acceptable and in the latter cases
that a
null value is not acceptable.  The question is whether the author
intended
such specifications of multiplicity and other semantics in the UML
diagram
to be normative.  The author answered that they are intended to be
normative.  However, the document calls the diagram "illustrative."

PROPOSAL

If in fact the semantics in the UML diagram are supposed to be
normative,
the specification should say so clearly.