Re: UML interface element suggestion

[Lars Clausen <lrclause cs uiuc edu>]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Kevin Page wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It would be useful to have a connection point added to the interface
> object in the UML section - something so that you can draw a
> dependency line to the circle part of the lollipop (to show that a
> class uses that interface).
>
> At the moment, when you draw in a connection then move the interface
> lollipop, you have to re-join the connection.

That would be useful.  Looking at the overall design, I wonder why
'interface' doesn't exist as a separate entity, but only as 'implements'.
Don't people use interfaces without knowing their implementation?  Isn't
that the whole point?  So shouldn't we have an 'interface' object that's
just a circle with name and connection points, and then an 'implements'
connector?

-Lars

-- 
Lars Clausen (http://shasta.cs.uiuc.edu/~lrclause)| Hårdgrim of Numenor
"I do not agree with a word that you say, but I   |----------------------------
will defend to the death your right to say it."   | Where are we going, and
    --Evelyn Beatrice Hall paraphrasing Voltaire  | what's with the handbasket?