Levi, Lee, John,
Thank you very much for the information/clarification and potential solutions. I guess what I’ve experienced exposes an issue of the tool seeming to allow functionality that is not apparently fully supported. From my position of getting very excited about the possibility of using MASL in my model (because I could select that option) there was nothing in the tool interface that suggested that I shouldn’t really choose the option without doing some more analysis/reading, or (if you like) ring alarm bells suggesting that what I was attempting required a particular consideration. Of course, my lack of deep analysis didn’t help the situation.
Nonetheless, the full inclusion of MASL for general modelling seems to be a very reasonable goal. On the other hand whilst ‘behaviour’ has to be defined and adequately specified for model execution, the language should not be so ‘powerful’ as to reduce the effort required to specify the data and state models (and their connection).
Because of my current pressing requirements to create a somewhat intricate model, I will put MASL aside for the moment and go back to good old OAL (in its