- From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 15:32:53 -0400
- To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Walden Mathews [mailto:waldenm@optonline.net] > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 3:05 PM > To: Francis McCabe; www-ws-arch@w3.org > Subject: Re: isa and hasa in UML > > > > This is interesting, and a little bit shocking. I can't tell > from this what the goal of the action item is. It became clear in Rennes that the current WD defined IS-A and HAS-A (or one or the other, can't remember) in a way that some found counter-intuitive. It seemed absurd for us to be defining terms that *just had* to be well understood, e.g. in the UML world. So we gave Frank the action item to go look for a well-accepted definition that we could reference. >
Received on Friday, 30 May 2003 15:32:55 UTC