Re: UML-Conformity



Am Donnerstag, 17. Juni 2004 03:02 schrieb Andrew Ross:
On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 04:01, RittervomNie web de wrote:
To enhance the standard UML components a class should have a checkbox
"Interface" to produce a dashed outline. It is not easy to create a
class-like shape containing methods and attributes, stereotypes and that.

What version of UML are you basing this on? In the current version of
UML (1.5)  interfaces are indicated using the stereotype <<interface>>.

M. Fowler, K. Scott, Addison Wesley, "UML Konzentriert" (I only know the 
german title) and Bernd Oestereich, Oldenbourg "Objektorientierte 
Softwareentwicklung" refer to 1.whatever UML and prefer a dashed outline of 
interfaces. If you haver other stereotypes it's a bit irritating to find 
"interface" among them. It's only an enhancement, optional, some tools do it, 
I did it the past few years, looks a bit cleaner for people ignoring 
stereotypes.


It's a bit early to be implementing UML 2.0, isn't it? After all, the
spec isn't even complete!

UML 2.0 has a lot of new features which will never be used (IMHO). Who draws 
exceptions breaking threaded sequences and so on? I've needed Class-, 
Sequence and Activity Diagrams, Use Case only for sketching. Diagrams must be 
easy to understand, not fancy 3d rendered piles of crap. Who can insert a 
class diagram containing 25 classes or interfaces with attributes and methods 
into a normal PDF? (printable on A4, shippable as book, not as map *g*)

It's also not possible to create a new focus on an existing lifeline or
connect a box to it (grouping, ok, but that's not it, not editable
anymore). It's also possible to work around with another life line
connected to the same class, putting it into background and so on...

I agree with this. It is quite annoying (not to mention conceptually
confusing).

At least switch of any text related to UML-Associations until it works
properly. Alignment is absolutely dirty and, as said before, no font
properties can be changed.

I wouldn't switch it off, since that would no doubt result in a bug
filed to have it added as a feature, even though it's already there
(although it could do with some improvement). There is already a bug or
two filed about text placement (roles, association names, and
multiplicities) for UML associations and messages:


Did'nt read this, sry.

http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65430
http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=118313

If these little things would be done by releasing 1.0 or 0.94 or
whatever, including a good documentation, 80 software developers would
use this tool at work. I love it, it's so independent and absolutely slim
designed, 3 already infected...(discoverd it by updating my SuSE Linux to
9.1)

I'd be willing to try and convince our uni to ditch Visio (which none of
the staff know how to use anyway).

I hate Rational (no interaction in already drawn sequence diagrams, only 
delete and redraw), dislike Visio (too much) and had to use Together. The 
best thing I ever saw was some nice Java-Tool, Composum. There you don't work 
diagram-based but document based. You can draw diagrams and insert them into 
the document editor. Best feature was to include different diagram figures 
into a sub-diagram and extract these sub-diagrams from the main diagram (only 
a thin outline, rubberband, marks included objects, looks like a package). 
Makes it easy to divide a digram into logical sub parts.


Cheers

Andrew




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]