W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-82: UML diagrams

From: Elisa F. Kendall <ekendall@sandsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:51:32 -0700
Message-ID: <48064AB4.2060403@sandsoft.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: public-owl-wg@w3.org

I am on holiday this week with my family, and was unable to call in 
today, but find this completely unacceptable.  The UML should, at a 
minimum, be correct UML given that there are folks in this working group 
willing to assist to make it correct, including but not limited to me.  
Peter Haase (who created the metamodel in the first place) and I have 
discussed working together to revise that as well.

I am also willing to assist in educating folks in the working group 
about the purpose of a metamodel, and why it is ideally suited to the 
purposes specified in the FS&SS.  Leaving it as is will only create 
confusion among UML savvy folks who are looking to this working group 
for leadership.

Elisa

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

>I propose to reject alignment between the UML diagrams in the Syntax
>document and the OMG ODM, as the purpose of the diagrams in FS&SS is
>very different from the purpose of the OMG ODM.
>
>I propose to accept that the diagrams may not be not ideal UML and
>invite the raiser of the issue to make specific suggestions for changes
>to them.
>
>Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>Bell Labs Research
>
>
>
>
>  
>
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 18:52:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 April 2008 18:52:19 GMT