OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
[ebxml-dev] Core components and UML

We believe that UN/CEFACT and ebXML use as a baseline UML (perhaps adapted
to the specific purpose of EDI with the UN/CEFACT version UMM). We have
difficulty in understanding how to apply the UML principles to the CCTS
especially when we look at the core components. All our analysts use
extensively UML and one of the prinicpal interests in ebXML and UN/CEFACT
is the strong attachment to UML as it enables us to remain business
orientated rather than syntax orientated. The standardisation of core
components that can be used within UML seem to be extremely rich to us and
we therefore want to align our basic constructs on their UN/CEFACT

The basic principle of UML is that a class is the description of a set of
objects that share the same attributes, operations, methods, relationships
and semantics. When one looks at the principles of the CCTS core
where a core component contains only the information pieces necessary to
describe a specific concept, one expects a UML class and a core component
to be very similar.

However, one does not understand the requirement within the CCTS that
obliges a basic core component only to be used in a aggregate core
component. Why can't an atomic part such as an attribut   (BCC)  be used
within any construct, as is possible in UML?

Can one assume that an ASCC is merely an association between two UML

There appears to be an inconsistancy between the use of a BCC that can
be referenced through an ACC, however, in a message construct one can mix
and mingle both ABIEs and BBIEs as appears in figure 4.2. Thus, since a
BBIE is based on a BCC one can construct a structure that contains both
ABIEs and BBIEs at the same hierarchical level. Is this correct? This does
appear however to be illogical from a UML point of view since an attribute
can't be a class.

I would appreciate a definition and example of datatype as it appears to
used all over the place with different meanings. My understanding is that
it is a set of values and thus only has significance if these values are
restricted. Is that correct?

My understanding of the CCT is that it corresponds to a UML attribute type
and that a BCC corresponds to an UML attribute and finally that an ACC
corresponds to a UML class? Is this correct?

If this is so, then I assume that the ABIE simply inherits the ACC through
a generalisation and that the generalisation itself provides the business
context. Is this exact?

However, if this is so I therefore have a problem with the BBIE, where
this fit into the UML picture?

I assume that the datatype notion can be derived from a constraint on the
type using a UML constraint built in OCL. Is this exact?

I know I'm asking an awful lot of questions, but since you people have
working so long with the CCTs and UML you have certainly worked all this
out already and thus will save me the time in trying to figure out the

Thank you for you comprehension.


Michel Hunsicker.

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]