[epp] It sounds that your definition of "port on the outside", i.e. "port role" in RoseRT corresponds to a UML ConnectorEnd. Although, a "port on the inside", that is, the port as defined in the capsule, also has a ConnectorEnd, when the port is a relay port.
[epp] I think this is a bit confusing. Unless I completely misunderstood your definitions of "on the inside" and "on the outside". The port-on-a-part ("on the outside") cannot be the exact same object as the port in its definition context (the capsule that owns the port, "on the inside"), because the capsule that owns the port can be used in several different contexts: If we have capsule A with port p, we can have capsule B with part a:A and capsule C with part a:A as well, but then the occurrence of A.p in B is B.a.p, is definitely not the same as the occurrence of A.p in C, that is, C.a.p. As I understand it, the A.p is the port "on the inside" while B.a.p and C.a.p are the ports "on the outside". Of course, you can click on any these and they show the same contents and you can edit their properties, but they are not the exact same object. Strictly speaking, when the port occurs in a context (on the outside), what you get in the UML model is a ConnectorEnd with a reference (called "role" in UML) to the actual UML Port that it represents, i.e. the port in its definition context (inside).
[epp] I am not proposing to change the UML 2 meta-model, and I cannot do it, anyway. I'm just stating that the meta-model already is like what you are describing with RoseRT. I may be misunderstanding things here as well, but to me, it looks like a ConnectorEnd is the same as a "port role". If not, what is the difference?
_______________________________________________
papyrus-rt-dev mailing list
papyrus-rt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/papyrus-rt-dev