Hi Tom, I didn't found any UML element named "Subsystem", only a stereotype <<Subsystem>>. Is this element from UML 1.4?
I found this paragraph in Superstructure at page 611: "A model owns or imports all the elements needed to represent a physical system completely according to the purpose of this particular model. The elements are organized into a containment hierarchy where the top-most package or subsystem represents the boundary of the physical system. It is possible to have more than one containment hierarchy within a model (i.e., the model contains a set of top-most packages/subsystems each being the root of a containment hierarchy). In this case there is no single package/subsystem that represents the physical system boundary." Here Subsystem is synonymous with Model, also notice the multiple root containers possibility described in the paragraph. IMO, it will be an artificial limit imposed by the ArgoUML tool, the restriction to have one root container. The Eclipse UML Editor can read a UML model with more than one root container, and then all the functionality is present for all the root containers. I programaticaly built a XMI file that represented a UML model with 2 root containers. Then opened the file with the Eclipse UML Editor and it worked. I created an association that linked two classes from the two containers. It worked and the UML validation was ok. (There is a possibility to check if the model is valid.) OTOH, it is not possible to create a multiple root containers with the same Eclipse UML Editor. Also the UML Diagrams from the Eclipse UML Tools project doesn't work with multiple root containers. This is my opinion, I will not insist more if you think breaking the 1:1 correspondence between a Project and a root container would be not desirable. Bogdan, On 7/7/07, Tom Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[I still haven't seen the original message -- either my personal copy or the one to the dev list -- strange!] The UML 2.x structure isn't really very different from UML 1.4 where Model and Subsystem are subtypes of Package also. Relaxing the requirement on the root element so that it can be a Package instead of a Model sounds fine since it will allow people to model pieces of a model independently. Breaking the 1:1 correspondance between an ArgoUML project, a root element, and an XMI serialization is something I'm less sure about. I think we should investigate what other tools allow before heading down this path. The mental model that I had in my head was that we would keep the 1:1 correspondance, but allow multiple ArgoUML projects to be connected together (and allow multiple projects to be open at a time). I think normally users will have the submodels and profiles set to be readonly (so they don't modify them inadvertently), but there may also be times when it is useful to work on multiple linked models simultaneously. All of this is largely orthogonal to the UML 2.x work since the same capabilities exist in UML 1.4. I expect that the Profile project will, of necessity, be dealing with many of these linking issues (but I haven't had time to keep up with what's going on there). Coordinating with them and making sure that you don't do anything which makes their work harder would be good, but I wouldn't let it slow down your work on UML2. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
