[Modeling] Modeling an Agent Class- problem with operations:

[Wagner, G.R.]

There seem to be two possible solutions for your problem with operations:

1) turn off this feature (of classes having operations that can be
called) in a AUML Profile for domain/analysis modeling

2) restrict the allowed callers of the operation to self (by means
of suitable constraints defined for the AUML Profile).

Does this help?

-Gerd


-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Hong Zhu
To: ModelingTC
Sent: 23.06.2003 10:21
Subject: Re: [Modeling] Modeling an Agent Class- register your opinion

Let's assume that it can be done this way, then, we must consider agents
are
special case of objects, because the semantics of class is defined as
follows. (the following is taken from Jim's email about UML's definition
of
class)
"-Semantics
The purpose of a class is to specify a classification of objects and to
specify the features that characterize the structure and behavior of
those
objects."

The question is, then, "Can agents be objects?" I doubt about it,
because
the semantics of object has this features defined as a part of UML
class'
semantics: (also taken from Jim's email)
"Operations of a class can be invoked on an object, given a particular
set
of substitutions for the parameters of the operation." Does this give
object
the freedon to refuse invocation of its operation? I think, a
characteristics of agents is that "agent can say no to operation
invocation". This is also from Jim's work.

Hong

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Odell" <email@jamesodell.com>
To: "ModelingTC" <modeling@fipa.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 7:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Modeling] Modeling an Agent Class- register your opinion


> On 6/20/03 7:45 AM, "Dr. Hong Zhu" indited:
>
> >> When you simply use the word Agent as the class name of the class
Agent
> >> you can produce a meta model in UML. Using UML as the modelling
> >> language does not mean that the behaviour of agents necessarily has
been
> >> limited to OO.
> >>
> >
> > I don't think the semantic definition of UML can be interpreted that
way.
>
> And, I am not so sure that it cannot be.  I guess it's time for us all
to
> demonstrate it one way or another.
>
> -Jim
>
> _______________________________________________
> Modeling mailing list
> Modeling@www.fipa.org
> http://fipa.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling
>

_______________________________________________
Modeling mailing list
Modeling@www.fipa.org
http://fipa.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling