[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.
>
>Conrad
More information about the Ccsds-omg-liaison
mailing list