Mixing UML and SysML

403 views
Skip to first unread message

JP

unread,
Aug 27, 2014, 8:54:42 PM8/27/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
On a project I'm working the lead modeler is using a class diagram in our SysML model.
 
It's my understanding (p. 88 of "A Practical Guide...") that a SysML model should ronly use the material found in the UML4SYSML profile as well as the material that exists solely in SysML.
 
However, I've also read that sometimes people on projects need to use UML diagrams that aren't in SysML (such as timing and communication diagrams). The argument for this approach is that what he is modeling is data, and is thus more suited to classes, so maybe he's right.
 
What do you guys think? Should someone mix UML and SysML?

James Towers

unread,
Aug 30, 2014, 1:46:24 AM8/30/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Hi JP,
My first thought is that this is unnecessary, as I can't think of any semantics in UML class diagram that can't be expressed in a SysML block diagram - both blocks and classes are equally as valid for modelling the structure of 'data'

On the other hand it's hard to find an issues that's caused by mixing UML & SysML, other than it perhaps illustrates a misunderstanding on part of the lead modeller - he's interpreting a difference between the two diagrams that doesn't exist




--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sysmlforum/67ca0fa8-f9ea-4753-a816-a89a6fa9d91d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Moderator, SysML Forum

unread,
Aug 31, 2014, 3:20:46 AM8/31/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Hello JP,

Your question about SysML+UML mixed modeling language usage is a relatively common one, and the SysML FAQ contains both a short and long answer to your question under the following FAQ: "Can SysML and UML model elements be combined in the same model?"
     - OR - 

/SysML Forum Editor
Message has been deleted

Matthew Hause

unread,
Sep 2, 2014, 12:30:35 PM9/2/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

If you have both software and hardware, in your project, then it is perfectly valid to use both. Try and maintain a separation of concerns between the two, with SysML representing the systems engineering and allocation of concerns, and UML representing the software in your model. That will help clarify how the different languages are being used. You can also use SysML to represent the hardware environment in which the software will be deployed. Define a process prior to starting and be sure to follow it.

I wrote a paper on this with a colleague a few years ago that we presented at INCOSE. Let me know if you want a copy.

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

JP

unread,
Sep 2, 2014, 1:32:47 PM9/2/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Yes, I would absolutely love to get a copy of that paper. I imagine it would be most helpful.
 
 
And in general, thanks for the responses guys. They've been a tremendous help. In some sense it's good to see that other folks struggle with similar concerns. :)

On Tuesday, September 2, 2014 11:30:35 AM UTC-5, Matthew Hause wrote:

If you have both software and hardware, in your project, then it is perfectly valid to use both. Try and maintain a separation of concerns between the two, with SysML representing the systems engineering and allocation of concerns, and UML representing the software in your model. That will help clarify how the different languages are being used. You can also use SysML to represent the hardware environment in which the software will be deployed. Define a process prior to starting and be sure to follow it.

I wrote a paper on this with a colleague a few years ago that we presented at INCOSE. Let me know if you want a copy.

 

From: sysml...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sysml...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Moderator, SysML Forum
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2014 2:21 AM
To: sysml...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [SysML Forum] Re: Mixing UML and SysML

 

Hello JP,

 

Your question about SysML+UML mixed modeling language usage is a relatively common one, and the SysML FAQ contains both a short and long answer to your question under the following FAQ: "Can SysML and UML model elements be combined in the same model?"

     - OR - 

 

/SysML Forum Editor

 


On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:54:42 PM UTC-7, JP wrote:

On a project I'm working the lead modeler is using a class diagram in our SysML model.

 

It's my understanding (p. 88 of "A Practical Guide...") that a SysML model should ronly use the material found in the UML4SYSML profile as well as the material that exists solely in SysML.

 

However, I've also read that sometimes people on projects need to use UML diagrams that aren't in SysML (such as timing and communication diagrams). The argument for this approach is that what he is modeling is data, and is thus more suited to classes, so maybe he's right.

 

What do you guys think? Should someone mix UML and SysML?

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com


To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.

Piaszczyk, CHRIS (AS)

unread,
Sep 4, 2014, 5:32:54 PM9/4/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

Me too!

SW and HW together in one system – isn’t that almost everything these days?

If I had not seen this conversation, I would be trying to model it all in SysML but Matthew is absolutely right – why not use the best of both.

To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com


To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com.

James Towers

unread,
Sep 5, 2014, 1:28:53 PM9/5/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
This sounds like we are saying model SW in UML and HW in SysML, which implies SysML is a Hardware Modelling Language?

It isn't, it's a Systems Modelling Language. You can model everything in SysML at the appropriate level of abstraction. It's only if you need to model at a more concrete level of software implementation, or utilise those diagrams which are curious omissions from SysML (such as the timing diagram) that you need to include UML. 



Piaszczyk, CHRIS (AS)

unread,
Sep 6, 2014, 2:39:14 AM9/6/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

James,

 

I didn’t mean that.

However, this remark stimulated in me these additional thoughts:

Let’s stick with SysML being a System Modeling Language “at the appropriate level of abstraction”.

Likewise, UML could be the SW modeling language if it brings something beyond that into the specific project at hand.

These days, using a term “HW” in the same sentence as “SW”, probably is understood as “computers and networking” equipment by most folks.

However, there are many hardware modeling tools (languages), specific to the kind of “hardware” being considered – mechanical, electrical, electronic, thermal, RF, etc.

And in many of today’s applications, for example, robotics, many such disciplines come together – including hydraulics, etc.

This is where SysML, UML, and many other MLs have to come together as well, each “at the appropriate level of abstraction”.

The boundaries between all these disciplines is where we are all having a bit of a problem, not being expert in them all.

Every one of us speaks a different language and we don’t understand one another.

And this is where I see the need for SysML to help us.

 

I am still interested in the paper.

Can you please post it somewhere, Matthew?

Martin, Bryce E

unread,
Sep 6, 2014, 2:39:26 AM9/6/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

The practice that I typically follow is to define the System Architecture including the Top Level SW Architecture using SysML which stops at the definition of the software units as blocks.  The SU blocks are treated as black boxes in SysML and then the UML model picks up where the SysML stops and treats the SU blocks as white boxes and the lower level details are defined in the UML model. 

 

Bryce Martin

256-722-4660

From: sysml...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sysml...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James Towers


Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 3:30 AM
To: sysml...@googlegroups.com

Matthew Hause

unread,
Sep 6, 2014, 2:40:01 AM9/6/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

@ James Towers.

No, that is not what I meant at all. Of course you can model software in SysML. I do so all the time. It says so in the definition of SysML. “SysML can be used for the systems engineering of hardware, software, people processes, etc.” However you should not model production software in SysML. It does not contain all the necessary constructs you need to adequately do so. You can however model software in SysML at the appropriate level of abstraction. The examples in the paper written by me and Francis Thom in fact bear this out. What is most important in a model containing both is that you maintain appropriate separation of concerns. This is all born out in the paper. Let me know if you would like me to send you a copy. You will see that we are in violent agreement.

 

From: sysml...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sysml...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of James Towers


Sent: Friday, September 5, 2014 4:30 AM
To: sysml...@googlegroups.com

pgkarous

unread,
Sep 6, 2014, 9:04:32 AM9/6/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
I apologize in advance for the long response below. Part of my response may vary from tool to tool since there is no official standardization for blending the two languages.

One simple approach that works well for my collegaues and I is to use SysML to model the system as a whole down to the point of an executable piece of software. SysML would be used to define the blackbox behavior of the executable, for example ports typed by provided and required interfaces, possibly the main behavior if it made sense (activity diagram or state machine diagram). There would be operations defined at this blackbox level that represent the major pieces of functions the piece of software must implement and operations would have activity diagrams (for example) that provide some detail about what that major function does. The actions on the activity diagram <<refine>> some requirement. If desired and if the modeling tool provides the capability, the SysML model may be executed at this level to verify the SysML model is an accurate reflection of the requirements. The key point there is that you are not executing the model to verify the implementation of the requirement, you are verifying that you have the right requirements and there are no defects in the requirements themselves. 

Then, a UML class (perhaps with a stereotype) specializes the SysML block. At this point the UML class still represents the same executable that the SysML block represents but it allows a clean break from the system model to the software model yet still allowing traceability since the models are linked via specialization and whatever other type of relationships you might prefer. 

With the specialization, this UML class inherits all of the ports,interfaces, operations, behaviors etc and may decompose them. For one thing, it may decompose the executable into classes using your typical composition, references etc. As an example, operations inherited from the blackbox may be overridden to show how the classes that make up the executable collaborate to realize the blackbox behavior.

For a more concrete example, on a large radar system I worked on, we had a SysML block called 'Radar Controller'. This block had operations that represented the major functions it must perform. The methods of the operations were activity diagrams. One such operation was 'Perform Timeline Management'. The actions of this activity diagram had <<refine>> relationships to requirements. Then a UML class in a different part of the model would specialize this block. It was called 'Radar_Controller_SW' and thus would inherit all the operations. The Radar_Controller_SW class would then have composition relationships to the classes that make it up. These would be UML classes some of which may be active classes etc. The 'Perform Timeline Management' operation of the 'Radar_Controller_SW' block would override the operation of the SysML Radar Controller block and would provide its own method, in this cases another activity diagram but this time the activity diagram has swim-lanes that represent the classes that make up the software executable. 

FAUDOU raphael

unread,
Sep 7, 2014, 12:35:39 PM9/7/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com, raphael FAUDOU
Hi,

Very cool that you could share this experience with SysML community. I personnaly appreciate a lot.

Just one question:  can you completely model your radar with SysML and UML languages? no need for mathematical and physical representations concerning signal processing algorithms? for physical simulation? no need for languages  like MATLAB/Simulink/Modelica/AMESim…?

In my experience, it is not just a question of mixing SysML and UML but rather mixing SysML with different other languages including UML. It makes links a little bit harder to establish...
But it is another question and I do not want to pollute this thread and JP’ question. If you are interested in continuing this discussion in private, just send a mail to raphael...@samares-engineering.com

Thanks
Raphaël


--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

James Towers

unread,
Sep 7, 2014, 12:35:51 PM9/7/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Thanks for the clarification Chris, I now understand
Regards

James

James Towers

unread,
Sep 7, 2014, 12:36:06 PM9/7/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Thanks for the clarification Matthew, much appreciated
Regards

James

turbogeek

unread,
Sep 7, 2014, 2:26:43 PM9/7/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
I agree, there are no semantics that are really different, but the style, constraints and completeness of a SysML model is very different.

The big difference that confuses old UML modelers is technique and correctness. SysML and the level of completeness that Sanford (Sandy) Friedenthal and friends teach is closer to and can in fact execute using a fUML engine. 99.99% of UML modelers create loosey goosey UML most software designers are used to. 

To say this another way, when a good SysML modeler defines behavior, it really is behavior. When a UML veteran modeler uses our older techniques, we were outlining behavior and tossing the results over the wall so that programmers create the behavior.

Mixing UML/SysML in my opinion is best done when you are working with very complex infrastructures like J2EE. You also don't want to throw SysML over the wall to programmers unless they have a lot of training.

 If you are building embedded systems or have good control over large parts of the behavior, I'd try SysML with fUML execution to create true and testable behavior. That said, you need excellent tools and a good mind to wrap your head around techniques  (a Phd in computer science vocabulary  helps too). 

With any luck, what is done in SysML and fUML will be how we all model in the future. Tools need to make it easier to do, but it is fantastic when it works. We need good fUML engines and/or bulletproof transforms to code, but what we have now is very powerful. 

Daniel Brookshier

On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 7:54:42 PM UTC-5, JP wrote:

Loyd Baker

unread,
Sep 7, 2014, 11:35:56 PM9/7/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
May i have a copy of your paper?

Thanks

T-Mobile. America’s First Nationwide 4G Network


On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:54:42 PM UTC-7, JP wrote:

On a project I'm working the lead modeler is using a class diagram in our SysML model.

 

It's my understanding (p. 88 of "A Practical Guide...") that a SysML model should ronly use the material found in the UML4SYSML profile as well as the material that exists solely in SysML.

 

However, I've also read that sometimes people on projects need to use UML diagrams that aren't in SysML (such as timing and communication diagrams). The argument for this approach is that what he is modeling is data, and is thus more suited to classes, so maybe he's right.

 

What do you guys think? Should someone mix UML and SysML?

--

Hall, Brendan (MN65)

unread,
Sep 8, 2014, 2:38:56 PM9/8/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

I too would like a copy of the paper

 

Best Regards

 

Bren

Monte L Porter Jr

unread,
Sep 8, 2014, 2:38:57 PM9/8/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Daniel - good to see you engaging - agree we need to focus on SysML - harder part is blending DoDAF with SysML ala UPDM 2.0
 
Monte Porter

310 The Bridge Street, Huntsville, AL 35806
CSC | phone: 256-799-3408| cell: 256:874-5894 |mpo...@csc.com | monte.p...@us.army.mil


-----sysml...@googlegroups.com wrote: -----
To: sysml...@googlegroups.com
From: turbogeek
Sent by: sysml...@googlegroups.com
Date: 09/07/2014 02:46PM

Subject: [SysML Forum] Re: Mixing UML and SysML

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose.

Darold

unread,
Sep 8, 2014, 3:38:42 PM9/8/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

Matthew,

 

You will probably get a lot of requests for this paper.  Can you post it on the i-net somewhere and provide the link.

 

Thanks.

 

Regards,

 

Darold K. Smith

PE (Software, Computer, & Electrical Engineering - Inactive)

CSEP (Certified Systems Engineering Professional, INCOSE)

 

903 217-8259

dsmit...@waldar.com

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sysmlforum/7A24380CF13EAB449C0350C7D662524511525A84%40de08ex3001.global.ds.honeywell.com.

Matthew Hause

unread,
Sep 8, 2014, 3:38:59 PM9/8/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

I have a paper on that as well if anyone is interested.

 

From: sysml...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sysml...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Monte L Porter Jr


Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 1:28 PM
To: sysml...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [SysML Forum] Re: Mixing UML and SysML

 

Daniel - good to see you engaging - agree we need to focus on SysML - harder part is blending DoDAF with SysML ala UPDM 2.0

 

Monte Porter

310 The Bridge Street, Huntsville, AL 35806
CSC | phone: 256-799-3408| cell: 256:874-5894 |mpo...@csc.com | monte.p...@us.army.mil

Matthew Hause

unread,
Sep 8, 2014, 9:00:12 PM9/8/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

I have already received more than a dozen requests for this paper so will post it on the Atego website later this week. I will let the group know where.

pgkarous

unread,
Sep 9, 2014, 8:03:55 AM9/9/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com, raphael...@samares-engineering.com
Hi,
 
Yes, we used other tools like MATLAB for performance analysis. We described the key performance parameters of the radar in the model as constraint properties owned by blocks and used parametric diagrams to show how the constraints related to each other, sort of like a fish-bone diagram. The values of the constraint properties were computed by MATLAB. MATLAB and the system model are integrated together using a tool called ModelCenter.
 
You are hitting on one of the key points. JPs original question was indeed about mixing UML and SysML but more generally it is interesting how to mix many different models together. In some cases you can buy plugins that work with a modeling tool allowing you to integrate different tools with the SysML model to exchange key pieces of information back and forth. Alternatively, some modeling tools provide you the ability to extend the tool yourself by offering a software library.
 
For MATLAB there are tools such as ModelCenter that allow you to integrate MATLAB with MagicDraw and IBM Rhapsody for example (it may work with others but I know it works with those). This allows you to use the right tool for the job yet still get the information into the model.
 
Having this information in the SysML model allows us to understand how tweaking one of these parameters might affect parts of the architecture or understand requirement impacts in a more complete way (the MATLAB models only contain performance analysis while the SysML model contains the architecture, requirements, etc.). Of course there is a cost associated with this tool integration and an analysis needs to be performed to determine the cost vs. benefit. 
 
In general, the SysML model stores truth and integrates with whatever other tools it needs to in order to accomplish this. How this integration is performed varies wildly from project to project depending on the need.

Matthew Hause

unread,
Sep 9, 2014, 11:13:35 AM9/9/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com, raphael...@samares-engineering.com

Since you bring it up, this capability also exists with Artisan Studio from Atego. In addition, you can mix behavioral simulation with the execution of Matlab. This provides a powerful means of trade-off analysis.

turbogeek

unread,
Sep 9, 2014, 12:05:00 PM9/9/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
Hi Monte,

Yes indeed! And I am certainly trying get more SysML into DoDAF :o) One of the new problems with UPDM/DoDAF is that the tools there, but not the education. I meet a lot of people that understand (well, a few) architecture and can apply it to a small amount of DoDAF. Sadly, not systems engineering (training and indoctrination are non existent). 

By using UPDM/SysML, you get very malleable architectures that work like Lego instead of concrete.

A good test is to create different configurations from your designs (OV/SV/SvcV can each have configurations). When you need a hammer and chisel to create a new scenario, there might be a problem with your modeling techniques. 

Dan George

unread,
Sep 9, 2014, 12:08:59 PM9/9/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com


On Monday, September 8, 2014 6:00:12 PM UTC-7, Matthew Hause wrote:

I have already received more than a dozen requests for this paper so will post it on the Atego website later this week. I will let the group know where.

 

From: sysml...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sysml...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Darold
Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 2:33 PM
To: sysml...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: EXT :Re: [SysML Forum] Re: Mixing UML and SysML

 

Matthew,

 

You will probably get a lot of requests for this paper.  Can you post it on the i-net somewhere and provide the link.

 

Thanks.

 

Regards,

 

Darold K. Smith

PE (Software, Computer, & Electrical Engineering - Inactive)

CSEP (Certified Systems Engineering Professional, INCOSE)

 

903 217-8259

dsmit...@waldar.com

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SysML Forum" group.
Public website: http://www.SysMLforum.com

To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sysm...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum.

Monte L Porter Jr

unread,
Sep 10, 2014, 2:22:02 PM9/10/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com
I like the "capability configuration".  Here is our current view on traceability from the PEO' perspective.  Still trying to walk the dog through the CV /OV quagmire.
 
We are putting together an "SE" profile with associated libraries to share - also working on a SOS testing profile (the SysML test stereotype has limited usefulness as we begin to look at testing complex systems
 
VR
Monte


310 The Bridge Street, Huntsville, AL 35806
CSC | phone: 256-799-3408| cell: 256:874-5894 |mpo...@csc.com | monte.p...@us.army.mil


-----sysml...@googlegroups.com wrote: -----
Date: 09/09/2014 11:16AM
Subject: Re: [SysML Forum] Re: Mixing UML and SysML

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Traceability.pptx

Matthew Hause

unread,
Sep 11, 2014, 2:00:54 AM9/11/14
to sysml...@googlegroups.com

Yes that is it. I had forgotten that it was posted to the SysML website. Several others are there as well.

To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com


To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sysmlforum?hl=en_US?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SysML Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sysmlforum+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to sysml...@googlegroups.com.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages