From: Rocco Caputo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > So we should talk about the semantic model. Illustatring > > this with notations might seem useful, but as we > > experienced in this thread it really produces > > misunderstandings. So we will have to give > > specifications. Which leads us to the UML specification, > > again. And this is what I suggest, reading the UML specs > > and discussing if (and how) we have to adjust or > > extend it to fit POE. > > > > As this might require too much time, reading tutorials > > or introductions would be enough as well to be able to > > know what is being talked about. > > > > The UML specs can be found on www.omg.org/uml (can't > > give a direct url, get no connection atm). If other > > people find good introductions/tutorials it might be > > helpful to post the URLs here. > > I have spent the better part of the weekend and Monday > researching the UML. I still don't know enough to discuss > it, but I have been avoiding reading the specification > directly.
AFAIK, the Uml is still a modelling language and not yet a programming language. So while the recently approved "Action Semantics" (http://cgi.omg.org/docs/ad/01-03-01.pdf) gives a specification for communicating state. It still doesn't give us the textual notation we can use with Perl. I gather that Rocco Caputo would prefer a textual notation that looks like Perl. Whereas torvald is recommending XMI. While XMI is adequate to the task, it isn't for humans. So there's no way perl programmers are going to inline XMI in their code. They might however consider something like HUTN. HUTN stands for Human-Usable Textual Notation, and is based on XMI. In fact it is round trip mappable between MOF (Meta- Object Facility) and XMI... and more importantly you can actually read it. HUTN slides: http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Pegamento/hutn/edoc2001.ppt spec: http://cgi.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/02-03-02 Both the slides and the proposal (sections 2.6-2.8) show examples of a MOF model represented in XMI and HUTN. However, HUTN seems oriented toward describing objects... I suppose XMI is too for that matter. I haven't yet read enough to figure out how someone would model states in HUTN. Still, it's food for thought... and might help prevent the tendency to reinvent wheels. While I've been reading up on UML, XMI, HUTN, etc. I ran across a number of papers which might be of interest. A Note on Semantics (with an Emphasis on UML): http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/296632.html State Based Service Description: http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/paech96state.html The Architecture Of A Uml Virtual Machine (2001): http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/493968.html Now I just have to find the time to digest it all... ;) -- Garrett Goebel IS Development Specialist ScriptPro Direct: 913.403.5261 5828 Reeds Road Main: 913.384.1008 Mission, KS 66202 Fax: 913.384.2180 www.scriptpro.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
