RE: [mdr-users] Borland Together, CWM, UML2MOF

The following fragment is wrong:

491                 <UML:StructuralFeature.type>
   492                  <UML:Classifier>
   493                   <UML:Namespace.ownedElement>
   494                    <UML:DataType xmi.idref = 'G.42'/>
   495                   </UML:Namespace.ownedElement>
   496                  </UML:Classifier>
   497                 </UML:StructuralFeature.type>

The <UML:Namespace.ownedElement> element is invalid XMI.
The fragment should be:

491                 <UML:StructuralFeature.type>
   492                  <UML:Classifier>
   494                    <UML:DataType xmi.idref = 'G.42'/>
   496                  </UML:Classifier>
   497                 </UML:StructuralFeature.type>


Cheers
Pete


Pete Rivett (mailto:[email protected]) 
CTO, Adaptive Inc. 
Dean Park House, 8-10 Dean Park Crescent, Bournemouth, BH1 1HL, UK 
Tel:  +44 (0)1202 449419 Fax: +44 (0)1202 449448 
http://www.adaptive.com 


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Martin [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 8:15 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [mdr-users] Borland Together, CWM, UML2MOF
> 
> We're evaluating Borland's Together as a UML modeling tool 
> for creating
> a metamodel extended from certain CWM packages.  To test this I first
> tried
> loading the CWM 1.0 source (in its .MDL Rose form) into Together,
> exporting
> it all to XMI, then running UML2MOF.  I get the following 
> exception from
> UML2MOF:
> 
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.util.DebugException: Cannot set a 
> multi-value to a
> non-multivalued reference:type
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XmiElement$Instance.setReferenceValue
> s(XmiEleme
> nt.java:699)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XmiElement$Instance.receiveValue(XmiE
> lement.jav
> a:723)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XmiElement$ObjectValues.endElement(Xm
> iElement.j
> ava:1470)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XmiSAXReader.endElement(XmiSAXReader.
> java:258)
>         at
> org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.maybeElement(Parser2.java:1720)
>         at 
> org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.content(Parser2.java:1963)
>         at
> org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.maybeElement(Parser2.java:1691)
>         at 
> org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.content(Parser2.java:1963)
>         at
> org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.maybeElement(Parser2.java:1691)
> ... (previous 2 repeated 13 more times)
>         at
> org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.parseInternal(Parser2.java:667)
>         at org.apache.crimson.parser.Parser2.parse(Parser2.java:337)
>         at
> org.apache.crimson.parser.XMLReaderImpl.parse(XMLReaderImpl.java:448)
>         at javax.xml.parsers.SAXParser.parse(SAXParser.java:345)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XmiSAXReader.read(XmiSAXReader.java:136)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XmiSAXReader.read(XmiSAXReader.java:107)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XMISaxReaderImpl.read(XMISaxReaderImp
> l.java:58)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XMISaxReaderImpl.read(XMISaxReaderImp
> l.java:51)
>         at org.netbeans.lib.jmi.uml2mof.Main.main(Main.java:56)
> [org.netbeans.lib.jmi.Logger] XMI parsing error at line: 497: 
> Cannot set
> a multi-value to a non-multivalued reference:type
> *********** Exception occurred ************ at Fri Apr 22 11:26:11 CDT
> 2005
> javax.jmi.xmi.MalformedXMIException:
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.util.DebugException: Cannot set a 
> multi-value to a
> non-multivalued reference:type
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XMISaxReaderImpl.read(XMISaxReaderImp
> l.java:64)
>         at
> org.netbeans.lib.jmi.xmi.XMISaxReaderImpl.read(XMISaxReaderImp
> l.java:51)
>         at org.netbeans.lib.jmi.uml2mof.Main.main(Main.java:56)
> ANNOTATIONS:
> [null] Exception occurred:
> 
> Export was done by selecting 'XMI 1.1 for UML 1.4 (OMG)'.  
> Here's what I
> think
> are the relevant portions.
> 
>      1  <?xml version = '1.0' encoding = 'ISO8859_1' ?>
>      2  <XMI xmi.version = '1.1' xmlns:UML = '//org.omg/UML/1.3'>
>      3   <XMI.header>
>      4    <XMI.documentation>
>      5     <XMI.exporter>
>      6          TogetherSoft
>      7     </XMI.exporter>
>      8     <XMI.exporterVersion>
>      9          6.0
>     10     </XMI.exporterVersion>
>     11    </XMI.documentation>
>     12    <XMI.metamodel xmi.name = 'UML' xmi.version = '1.4'/>
>     13   </XMI.header>
>     14   <XMI.content>
>     15    <UML:Model xmi.id = 'S.1' name = 'Project' visibility =
> 'public'>
> ...
>    477              <UML:Class xmi.id = 'S.26'
>    478                    name = 'VocabularyElement' visibility =
> 'public' isSpecification = 'false'
>    479                    isAbstract = 'false' isActive = 'false'>
>    480               <UML:Classifier.feature>
>    481                <UML:Attribute xmi.id = 'S.37'
>    482                      name = 'definition' visibility = 'public'
> isSpecification = 'false'
>    483                      changeability = 'changeable' ownerScope =
> 'instance' type = 'G.42'>
>    484                 <UML:StructuralFeature.multiplicity>
>    485                  <UML:Multiplicity>
>    486                   <UML:Multiplicity.range>
>    487                    <UML:MultiplicityRange lower = '1' upper =
> '1'/>
>    488                   </UML:Multiplicity.range>
>    489                  </UML:Multiplicity>
>    490                 </UML:StructuralFeature.multiplicity>
>    491                 <UML:StructuralFeature.type>
>    492                  <UML:Classifier>
>    493                   <UML:Namespace.ownedElement>
>    494                    <UML:DataType xmi.idref = 'G.42'/>
>    495                   </UML:Namespace.ownedElement>
>    496                  </UML:Classifier>
>    497                 </UML:StructuralFeature.type>
> ...
>  39452      <UML:DataType xmi.id = 'G.42'
>  39453            name = 'String' visibility = 'public' 
> isSpecification
> = 'false'/>
> 
> Any ideas?  I'm relatively new to MDR/XMI, but this seems 
> like it's just
> saying
> that the type of VocabularyElement.definition is String, which seems
> plausible
> enough.  Or is there something else about this XMI that 
> Together didn't
> generate
> correctly?
> 
> Mike
>