« The standardisation community universally agreed that UML 2 would need rigorous underpinnings. However, no-one knew exactly what "rigorous" should mean, or how one should go about achieving it. Gradually, a small group of academics, who did have an idea of what rigorous could mean and how one could go about it, became involved in standardisation. »
« Other than their nationality, the various French proposals shared nothing in common, so their collective stance kept changing depending on who was representing the group at any given point in time. This was highly amusing, but indicative of an ineffective standardisation process. »
« At one extreme was a camp that wanted to put a badge on their existing imperative programming language and call it QVT. At the other extreme was a camp that believed one could specify first order logic constraints and always efficiently find an optimal solution (something that would lead to the known laws of mathematics being rewritten). »
