|Suggestions required please .... firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-04-03)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... email@example.com (1999-04-06)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... firstname.lastname@example.org (Dobes Vandermeer) (1999-04-06)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... email@example.com (1999-04-09)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-04-09)|
|Re: Suggestions required please .... email@example.com (1999-04-10)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Dwight VandenBerghe)|
|Date:||6 Apr 1999 22:47:30 -0400|
On 3 Apr 1999 21:54:53 -0500, email@example.com (MarkAGr) wrote:
> I'm designing an OOA/OOD tool and have got to the point where I
>need to think of a prose representation for a UML-like methodology.
Mark, you could do worse that to use MOF - the Meta-Object Facility
that is used to define both UML and its constraint language, OCL. It
is lean and mean, reflective, powerful enough to define itself as well
as "languages" like UML. You can get pointers to the spec from the
OMG website, I think : www.omg.org.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.