From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8fbb80525a3ce8ee
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-20 01:55:30 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!opentransit.net!wanadoo.fr!proxad.net!feeder2-1.proxad.net!news1-2.free.fr!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: UML & Ada
References: <9tc0qk$cee$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BF9EB02.D9946B9B@acm.org>
 <slrn9vk9f4.3qs.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
From: Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 10:55:26 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID: <3bfa2891$0$32069$626a54ce@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Nov 2001 10:55:29 MET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.140.208.29
X-Trace: 1006250129 news1-2.free.fr 32069 158.140.208.29
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16709
Date: 2001-11-20T10:55:29+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> writes:

> I have been looking a bit on OMT as it is used in an OOP text book I
> bought. Does anybody know how good OMT is? 

If I do remember correctly, OMT is a predecessor of UML.  If I'm
right, looking at OMT know is not something advisable.

-- 
Jean-Marc