Subject: SDL-News: Re: UML 2.0 and SDL
From: Rick Reed TSE (rickreed#tseng.co.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 03 2004 - 11:39:13 GMT
Become an SDL Forum Society member <http://www.sdl-forum.org/Society/members.htm>
The originator of this message is responsible for its content.
-----From Rick Reed TSE <rickreed#tseng.co.uk> to sdlnews -----
Jonathan Mark J Lingard at JonathanMark2004#lingard.com wrote on 02/03/04
> Can you tell me if with the advent of UML 2.0, SDL2000 will become redundant,
> ie is SDL2000 a subset of UML?
Yes and No!
The plan is for SDL to be a profile of UML.
UML2.0 (like UML1.4) has a number of "semantic variation points".
In other words there semantics of UML2.0 (in particular for behaviour)
are deliberately not defined in some places and further
definition is require for the development of real applications.
There are many variants of UML and to get a language that
is well defined a profile has to be added to UML.
There is already a document (Z.109) binding SDL to UML.
It is planned to reissue this in line with UML2.0 to define
a UML profile for SDL2000.
The net result is that from a user viewpoint you may seem to be
using UML2.0, but a tool that implements UML2.0 (so that executable
unambiguous software can be produced) has to be bound to some
real semantics. For state machine models the most sensible binding
is to SDL.
Another viewpoint is that UML2.0 provides a framework for bind various
languages (such as MSC, SDL and TTCN) together. But note that to bind the
semantic variations profiles are needed for each of these languages (indeed
the ITU plans Z.129 for MSC and Z.149 for TTCN). Sometimes these profiles
may be implicit in the implementation of tools - but they still exist.
-- Rick Reed - rickreed#tseng.co.uk Tel:+44 15394 88462 Mob.:+44 7970 50 96 50
--End text from Rick Reed TSE <rickreed#tseng.co.uk> to sdlnews --- For extra SDL Forum Society benefits join at <http://www.sdl-forum.org/Society/members.htm>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Thu May 09 2013 - 16:05:50 GMT