Re: AW: Peter's slides about the MOF metamodel

On Aug 5, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Conrad Bock wrote:

> Alan,
>
>>  Either:
>
>>  1) The Model is presented in one place, and portion of a document
>>  that defines a syntax explicitly gives how one maps from the syntax
>>  to the model or
>
> This assumes we have one metamodel for multiple syntaxes, see  
> discussion
> with Bijan.
>
>>  2) The Model that is presented interleaved with the functional style
>>  syntax models that syntax.
>
> This is the case in the syntax document.  A model of that particular
> syntax is inteleaved with the rest of the documentation on that  
> syntax.
>
>>  The current situation asks for confusion. We have two different
>>  things presented as if they are one.
>
> Sorry, didn't follow, are #1 and #2 the two things we're currently
> doing?

It is my impression that we are doing neither. My take is that we  
have a model related to, but not of, the syntax, as the order of  
elements in the expressions is not captured and in the functional  
syntax order matters.

So to get to 1 we would pull the model out and make mapping explicit  
or to get to 2 we would add ordering to the model.

-Alan