I have a sequence diagram that I've created that admittedly has some redundant "notes". It seems they are mainly ignored which is reasonable. However, I was wondering the following is a bug or expected behavior.
The UML code is:
@startuml
note left: TS=0000000643
note left: TS=0000000643
group GroupA
ClientA ->> ClientB : REQ
note left: TS=0000000665
ClientB -->> ClientA : RESP (Expect: TS=0000000667)
note left: TS=0000000667
end
...Some Delay...
note left: TS=0000003409
note left: TS=0000003410
note left: TS=0000003411
group GroupB
ClientA ->> ClientB : REQ
note left: TS=0000003426
end
@enduml
As the RESP mentions, I expect the RESP line to have a note with "TS=0000000667", but the generated image uses the timestamp after the "...Some Delay..." (TS=0000003411). Is this expected behavior? I realized the "...XXXX..." syntax does not support a note. However, I'd also expect the "ClientB -->> ClientA: RESP" to use the very next note, not the one further down before the group. Again I realize this may be an odd use case, but plantuml does ignore the extra notes, it just gets confused.
