[Ccsds-omg-liaison] Fwd: RE: AB Evaluation of space-05/05/01

Adrian J. Hooke adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov
Fri Jun 17 12:59:09 EDT 2005

>Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:58:46 -0400
>From: Conrad Bock <conrad.bock at nist.gov>
>Subject: RE: AB Evaluation of space-05/05/01
>To: Sridhar Iyengar <siyengar at us.ibm.com>
>Cc: ab at omg.org, dtc at omg.org,
>  Simon C Gerry Contr Det 12/VOC <Gerry.Simon at schriever.af.mil>, 
> pm-sig at omg.org,
>  space at omg.org, ptc at omg.org
>Hi Sridhar,
>  > I agree that the concepts overlap with what is in UML2 (as well as
>  > common scripting/programming languages).  Because this is a domain
>  > spec, I felt insisting/requiring reuse of significant parts of UML2 -
>  > may introduce terminology(and other metamodel dependencies) not
>  > necessarily familiar to experts in the space domain.
>By that argument, none of the domain-independent models adopted in the
>PTF would be reused by the domains.
>Terminolgy is not much of a barrier, since space operations and the UML
>structured activities come from the same experience-base, ie, code.
>They both use the terms conditional, loops, expressions, pre and
>postconditions, parameters, control flow, and other language.
>In the few cases where there are terminology differences, profiles are
>available for renaming, or subtyping using MOF.  If OMG builds a new
>model for every domain that uses different terms for the same thing,
>we'll have quite a lot of non-interoperable models for the same
>concepts.  In the case of space operations, we'll have two models using
>the same names for the same things.

More information about the Ccsds-omg-liaison mailing list