Re: Problem space

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

"Alexandre E. Kopilovitch" <aek@vib.usr.pu.ru> writes:

> Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> wrote:

> >There is nothing to prevent definition of a subset ('profile') that is
> >rigorously-enough defined to be translated. You can do that with a
> >small core of UML. For example, http://www.projtech.com/
> 
> Well, but with that customization you lose "U" in "UML". And after
> several such "rigorizations" of different but substantially
> overlapping subsets, what will you have? Do you think that you will
> still dealing with the UML rather then with some family of
> incompatible dialects?

I doubt there is a project in the world that has used all the features
of the UML. Any project should subset the UML, just as you would
subset Ada. Certainly for translation, you need to restrict yourself
to that subset which includes the detail you need, with defined
semantics. You should also be able to include some of the woolly parts
to help explain what's going on without affecting the translation
(like comments).

No point in a universal language which no one can agree on the
semantics of!

I came across a vendor (I-Logix?) who had extended sequence diagrams
to allow their tool to perform automated testing, but at the cost of
non-standard usage I think.

UML includes extension mechanisms, a profile is (by one definition) a
statement of the subset and extensions (stereotypes and tagged values)
with their interpretations.