Comment 1 Raphael Faudou 2011-12-30 07:24:22 EST

Currently when we have an instance specification classified by a classifier (let us say "Class1") we can create a slot associated to "property1" of "Class2" even there is no relationhsip between class1 and class2. This is inconsistent.

Suggestion: when defining an instance specification, once at least one classifier is precised, the slots should be limited to features of the classifiers or inherited classifiers and not the complete list.

Comment 2 Raphael Faudou 2011-12-30 07:24:33 EST

Currently when we have an instance specification classified by a classifier (let us say "Class1") we can create a slot associated to "property1" of "Class2" even there is no relationhsip between class1 and class2. This is inconsistent.

Suggestion: when defining an instance specification, once at least one classifier is precised, the slots should be limited to features of the classifiers or inherited classifiers and not the complete list.

Comment 3 Ronan Bar 2014-01-21 04:23:41 EST

Created attachment 239164 [details]
Test Model

Comment 4 Ronan Bar 2014-01-21 04:23:48 EST

I also think this needs to be fixed. Papyrus does not report an error when a slot from a classifier it is not defined by is used. The search space needs to be restricted to only valid properties on the defining classifier.

In the attached my model I have created a slot based on the the property onZ, from class Z. The classifier for the InstanceSpecification is a class B which has no relation to class Z.

Comment 5 Klaas Gadeyne 2015-11-27 11:59:23 EST

See Bug 333733 for a duplicate of this bug, including a solution which seems to be papyrus' best kept secret...

As put forward by Christian in Bug 457172 Comment 3, I also think that the UML form-based property view should support the user for building correct by construction models (if not: where are you going to draw the boundary?  Why not allow to drag activities in a Composite Structure Diagram?).

Hence: Please mark as a duplicate of Bug 333733.