![]() |
Telelogic Rhapsody (steve huntington) | ![]() |
Topic Title: Rhapsody non-compliance with OMG SysML version 1.0 Topic Summary: Appears to be many non-compliance issues with rhapsody to year old SysML std. Created On: 30-Sep-2008 16:48 Status: Read Only |
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch |
![]() |
![]()
|
![]() |
|
Dr. Hoffmann:
I'm on a military development program where we agreed to deliver the SysML ver 1.0 compliant model to the customer in the open exchange format. When working in Rhapsody I always have the Std open to refer to. Time and time again I find missing SysML constructs and non-compliant issues with rhapsody ver 7.3. I hope some effort is underway at Telelogic to bring this tool into compliance in the very near future. We bought into this product believing that it was compliant and now over a year after the release of the standard we find it still has many non-compliancy issues. Refer to Requirement diagrams: I can not find testCase, Requirement containment, CopyDependency, MasterCallout, Derive Dependency, DeriveCallout, or Satisfy Dependency. There is a Satisfy, but it doesn't seem to allow me to point the arrow towards the requirement as described in the Std (see Table 16.2 of OMG SysMLTM , Version 1.0). In addition the attributes for Requirements are named differently. In the Std the requirement is defined in the Text attribute, while Rhapsody has a specification. Refer to pg 217 of Std in the creation of moe Stereotypes. where are the SysMLPRoperty and other missing stereotypes? Is there a list of non-compliant issues in Rhapsody? That would aid us in planning what we need to tell our customer. Because we agreed to deliver a compliant model, simple "work-arounds", probably will not result in a compliant exchange format model. Regards, Keith Smith |
|
![]() |
FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2009 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.