[news.eclipse.modeling.mdt.uml2.uml] Re: Are these associations not impl

["Kenn Hussey" <khussey@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, the 1.x UML2 implementation was based on an interim draft that predated 
the official 2.0 version of the specification.

Kenn

"James Bruck" <jbruck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
news:en713v$5la$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi Sunny
>
> Very interesting.  I can see the relationships you refer to in the older 
> 05-07-04 version of the spec. but cannot see any Activity.getVariables() 
> etc. in the older implementation.   Such functions do exist in the newer 
> implementation as well as helpers such as createVariable() and 
> getVariable(...).
> I'm not sure why that does not exist in the older implementation.   I'll 
> have to ask Kenn about that and get back to you.  (It might be the case 
> that these variables were introduced in the spec after the implementation 
> was complete)
>
> Happy New Year,
>
> - James.
>
>
> "Sunny" <sunfire001@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
> news:65396381ce89b8d31d280a0dd67e91b3$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Hi,
>>
>> I found that some associations in UML2.0 superstructure were not 
>> implemented in the uml2_1.1.1. For example, Activity.variable (pp. 297) 
>> and BehavioralFeature.ownedParameter (pp.29), etc. The javadoc of each 
>> class of the metamodel has a "supported features" section, but I am 
>> wondering if there exists a complete list of all those 
>> unsupported/supported associations. Thank you.
>>
>> Happy new year,
>>
>> -- Sunny
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>