Omg issue Number

Disposition: Resolved

OMG Issue No: 11867

Title: For the sake of consistency, the rtf stereotype should be renamed

Source:

THALES (Mr. Sebastien Demathieu, Sebastien DOT demathieu AT thalesgroup DOT com)

Summary:

For the sake of consistency, the rtf stereotype should be renamed as rtFeature.

Rationale:

The other MARTE real-time stereotypes use the “rt” prefix and first-letter-capitalization of the primary target metaclass.

Resolution:

Rename «rtf» to be «rtFeature».

Revised Text:

Replace ALL «rtf» with «rtFeature».

Disposition: Resolved

Disposition: Resolved

OMG Issue No: 11868

Title: suggest removing the notion of feature in the conformance section

Source:

Thales (Sebastien Demathieu, [e-mail])

Summary:

I whould suggest removing the notion of feature in the conformance section. As this notion is not used in other places of the document.

Resolution:

Agree on the proposal.

Revised Text:

In first paragraph of the section 2.2, replace “In order to properly identify the elements of MARTE that will be required in each compliance case, the following definitions are made:” by “In order to properly identify the elements of MARTE that will be required in each compliance case, the following definition is made:”

Delete the paragraph: “FEATURES: There might be a number of specific Features which may or may not be present in a concrete implementation. This variability may come from the concrete UML elements allowed to be used for the extension with stereotypes, their semantic variations, envisioned difficulty for implementation, expected usage, presentation options, etc. Though this is provided here for easier the description of tools compliance, its utilization is discourage in favor of the implementation of complete extensionUnits.”
And on page 3, last paragraph, replace “…set of extension units and/or features that…” by “…set of extension units that…”

Disposition: Resolved

Disposition: Resolved

OMG Issue No: 11869

Title: Section 6: Remove the MSWord comment

Source:

Thales (Sebastien Demathieu, [e-mail])

Summary:

Remove the MSWord comment "[N.B. Clearly, this is something..." in the related standard section

Resolution:

Ok, see revised text.

Revised Text:

In section 6.1, on page 6, replace “The UML profile for Systems Engineering (SysML), which deals with many of the same areas, such as the modeling of platforms and their constituent elements (hardware resources) and the allocation of software to platforms (i.e., deployment). In areas where there is conceptual overlap, MARTE is either reuses the corresponding SysML stereotypes, or defines elements that are conceptually and terminologically aligned with SysML. [NB: Clearly, this is something that we have to agree on as well.]” by “The UML profile for Systems Engineering (SysML), which deals with many of the same areas, such as the modeling of platforms and their constituent elements (hardware resources) and the allocation of software to platforms (i.e., deployment). In areas where there is conceptual overlap, MARTE is either reuses the corresponding SysML stereotypes, or defines elements that are conceptually and terminologically aligned with SysML.”

Disposition: Resolved

Disposition: Resolved

OMG Issue No: 11870

Title: In section 6.1, I would suggest mentioning RTCORBA and CCM

Source:

THALES (Mr. Sebastien Demathieu, [e-mail])

Summary:

In section 6.1, I would suggest mentioning RTCORBA and CCM

Recommendation:

Adding a reference to these OMG specifications sounds reasonable. RTCORBA indeed addresses real-time concerns, and CCM addresses composition concerns, which are both addressed by MARTE.

Revised Text:

The following item could be added in the first enumeration of page 6, section 6.1:

- The RTCORBA and CCM specifications address issues related to software execution platforms, real-time constraints, composition mechanisms, etc. i.e. issues that are all in the scope of the MARTE specification. All these computing platforms may be then considered as specific resources for executing MARTE model-based application.

Disposition: Resolved

Disposition: Resolved

OMG Issue No: 11875

Title: Relationship between Alloc::Allocation and SRM::EntryPoint

Source:

THALES (Mr. Sebastien Demathieu, [e-mail])

Summary:

Relationship between Alloc::Allocation and SRM::EntryPoint should be clarified (maybe a generalization relationship?)

Resolution:

SRM::EntryPoint shloud specialized the Alloc::Allocation stereotype.

Revised Text:

Figure 14.5

Old:

New:

Figure 14.25

Old :

New :

Stereotype Description section to update :

Old :

This stereotype matches to the domain concept, EntryPoint, defined on page Error: Reference source not found.

Extensions

• 
  Dependency (from UML::Classes::Kernel).
  
• 
  BehavioralFeature (UML::Classes::Kernel).
  

New :

This stereotype matches to the domain concept, EntryPoint, defined on page “To define”.

Generalizations

• 
  Allocate (from Alloc) on page “to define”.
  

Class Description section to update :

Old :

Generalizations

• 
  ModelElement
  

New :

Generalizations

• 
  Allocation (from Allocations)
  

Disposition: Resolved