No objection here.
> Scott,
>
> It basically comes down to the fact that not all UML
tools support it.
> I think we should still recommend it, just not make it mandatory.
>
>
jim
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Scott Came
[mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 11:27 AM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [legalxml-intj-exmndr] Recap of issue on domain
modeling
>
>
> Yes, this more accurately reflects what we agreed to.
>
>
Jim, perhaps you can offer an argument as to making XMI optional?
>
>> My minor suggested tweaks
are included below in bold.
>>
>>
>> --- Ellen
>>
>> The
information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity
> to
>> which it is addressed and
may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> material. If you received this in error, please contact the
sender and
>> delete the material from any computer.
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Scott Came
[mailto:]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 11:13 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: [legalxml-intj-exmndr] Recap of issue on domain
modeling
>>
>>
>> Here is what I took as consensus from our discussion this morning.
I
>> agree with this; Tom, since you were the other active participant in
> the
>>
discussion, could you please post back with your agreement as well, or
>> suggested modifications. Others
feel free to chime in as well. I will
>> then make sure this gets into the Domain Modeling section in the
MNDR.
>>
>> (Again, keep in mind, we're saying what's necessary for compliance
> with
>> the MNDR, not that the whole world should do what we say.)
>>
>> 1. A domain model
must be created.
>>
>> 2. The domain model must be at least one of: a spreadsheet, a
>> concept map, or a UML class diagram. (What these things are, in
> detail,
>> will be
described in the document.)
>>
>> 3. The domain model should be a UML class diagram.
>>
>> 4. If the domain model is a UML class diagram, then the diagram must
> be
>> supplied in XMI and image (JPG or PNG) format. The image format must
>> not contain symbols or
notation that are not part of standard UML
> class
>> diagrams.
>>
>> 5.
Nothing in this specification precludes a domain model from being
>> documented, published, or displayed
using diagramming notation other
>> than standard UML, provided that the domain model also be supplied
>> according to the provisions of rule #4.
>>
>> 6. The domain-GJXDM mapping artifact
must not rely on (replaces
>> "reference ") any domain model concept or element that is not
>> represented in standard UML notation. Proprietary concepts may be
>> included in the mapping
artifact as long as they do not determine the
>> mapping results.
>>
>> Thanks,
everyone.
>> --Scott
>>
>>
>
>
