[news.eclipse.modeling.mdt.uml2] Re: Creating Stereotype extending Assoc

["Kenn Hussey" <Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Vlad,

Yes, this article was written long ago but James has been updating it (thus 
the more recent date stamp).

Kenn

"Vlad Varnica" <varnica@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
news:25248d7d35128ce82bbbfb25e4b3938b$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi kenn,
>
> In your article you said : It is important to note that the use of 
> annotations in this manner is non-standard and therefore not directly 
> supported by the UML editor.   If you decide to export your model with 
> keywords to XMI, the annotations would be moved into an XMI extension. 
> Consumers of the XMI format could conceivably continue to use your 
> keywords if they know how to work with the newly created XMI elements.
> If you add a keyword with RSA, Papyrus, Topcased or any other tool then at 
> the transformation stage you will certainly loose this information but if 
> you do it with Omondo then you don't loose this information. As I always 
> say: The best transformation is no Transformation :-)
>
> Concerning MOF based versus UML Extension this is very interesting point. 
> At Omondo we have added the glue between the four stages. I mean # Stage 
> 1: UML diagrams (GEF)
> # Stage 2: UML Superstrucutre (EclipseUML2 metamodel)
> # Stage 3: Model transformation (EMF)
> # Stage 4: MOF My answer to this MOF versus UML Extensions dilema would be 
> "let users do as they want to use MOF or UML extension as long as they use 
> standard Ecore".
>
> btw, You have signed this article with James Bruck in June 2008 but it 
> seems to me that you have already been working for Embarcadero and not 
> anymore for IBM at that time ? Am I right ?
>
>