Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - PhilR

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
16
General Board / Re: Problems moving requirements from DOORS to EA
« on: March 19, 2003, 06:32:22 pm »
Make sure you have the "Export" option checked.  The default is "Import".

Works OK for me.

PhilR

17
General Board / Re: Evaluating EA
« on: March 17, 2003, 06:53:10 pm »
I don't know what DOORS can export but the simplest way to import requirement into EA is to use the comma delimited (.csv) import.  If DOORS can produces a .csv file (likely) then you should be able to import it.

PhilR

18
General Board / Re: training?
« on: March 17, 2003, 06:49:50 pm »
This might be relevant since you are based in Australia.  We offer UML Training courses based on EA.

See http://members.iinet.net.au/~lonsdale/courses/lons011/
for more details.

The next course is in Perth 7th - 9th April.

PhilR

PS Shameless plug - we also travel overseas to present training courses.

19
General Board / Re: Usecase uses releationships
« on: March 12, 2003, 06:22:56 pm »
Hi Guys,

Yes the <<uses>> stereotype is not part of the UML 1.4 spec.  It has been replaced by the <<includes>> stereotype.  Note the worst thing you can do with a standard is keep changing it.

Simple solution to confusion over <<extend>> and <<include>> - don't use them ;-)

PhilR

20
General Board / Re: Use Case scenarios
« on: January 23, 2003, 11:29:50 pm »
Hi James,

EA does not really support this style of use case scenario and I can't really think of a way to achieve it other than linking the use case to an external wordprocessor file that held the use case scenario.  See Use case Properties|Files tab to do this.

Even if EA does not suit your preferred use case format I would encourage you to evaluate it further as it is an awesome product.

Phil

21
General Board / Re: Building Profiles and Patterns
« on: February 03, 2003, 08:48:22 pm »
Hi Michael

Try
http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/uml_profiles.htm
for information on how to build profiles.  It is the very first file on this page and tends to get lost among the profiles themselves.

I have followed the info in this doc and sucessfully built a profile.

I came to the same conclusion as you that some of the "built in" profile icons are somehow embedded in EA.

I drew my icons using Visio and saved them as .emf files.  I guess any drawing editor would do.

There are a few sizing issues with the icons that I have not reported yet.  Interested to see if you have similar problems.

Hope this helps,
Phil

22
General Board / Re: Decision
« on: January 29, 2003, 05:26:39 pm »
You can always "right-click" on the diagram and select "Locate in project browser" if you need to find a specific decision in the project browser.

If they cause a problem with documentation, you can always put them in a separate folder. "Right-click" and select "RTF Documnet Options..." to exclude them from RTF documentation.

Thanks for the UML reference.  I think there are underlying problem with the activity diagram meta-model that the OMG plans to fix in a later release of UML.

Don't worry about you life becomming "sad".  I regularly use the UML spec as a cure for insomnia and never remember what I read in the morning ;)

Phil

23
General Board / Re: Decision
« on: January 28, 2003, 05:35:29 pm »
Hi,

My 2 cents.

I am pretty sure that it is wrong to refer to this element as a "decision" box.  The UML calls it a "branch" or "merge" rather than a decision.

Any condition associated with the branch or merge should appear as guard conditions on the lines entering or leaving the symbol.  These lines represent state transitions rather than flows of any description.  This is all to do with the meta model for activity diagrams which in the UML are in fact a special case of state diagrams.

Old-style flow chart notations use the same diamond symbol but label it with the condition such as "Account overdue?".  The lines leaving the symbol correspond to the possible outcomes of the decision (in this case "yes" or "no").  This is a totally different type of diagram and not part of the UML  :o

The upshot of this is that it is incorrect to label a "decision" box.  EA allows you to create a decision with no name which is correct UML.

Hope this helps - if it doesn't the trivia may be useful someday  ;D

Regards,
Phil

24
General Board / Re: Customising HTML output
« on: January 27, 2003, 06:12:10 pm »
Hi Mark,

You can customise the HTML output in the following way.

Click on the "Resource View" tab in the "Project Brwoser".

Expand the "Templates" folder.

Right-click on the "Web Style Templates" folder.  A single option "Create HTML Template" will be displayed.  Select this option.

Enter a name for your template.

A new template will be created with the EA default values.

AT this point you will need to read the help file which describes how to modify the template.  I have only played about with this feature and never used it in anger, so I am not completely sure what can be achieved.

Regards,
Phil.

25
General Board / Re: Stetes and Specify Feature Visibility
« on: January 23, 2003, 09:13:39 pm »
This must be a bug.  Tags and constraints don't display either.

Meybe report to Sparx?

Phil.

26
General Board / Re: UML class diagrams from PHP classes?
« on: January 22, 2003, 11:26:02 pm »
The simnple answer is no.

However, Sparx have mentioned that a future version of EA will provide user-defined code templates.  When this happens you can either define your own PHP templates or wait for someone else to.

Another possibility is to use the automation interface to write your own code generator.

I have used PHP to access the automation inetrface as a COM object.  It is not too difficult to do this but requires a bit of digging about in the PHP and EA documentation.

I have pasted a "hello world" version of the code below.

Phil

<?php

$ea = new COM("EA.Repository") or die("Can't open EA");
$ea->OpenFile("C:\pathname to EA model...");

for ($m=0; $m<$ea->Models->Count; $m++){
   $model=$ea->Models->GetAt($m);
   echo "<h1>$model->Name</h1><br>";
   for ($p=0; $p<$model->Packages->Count; $p++) {
       $package=$model->Packages->GetAt($p);
       echo "<h2>$package->Name</h2><br>";
       for ($e=0; $e<$package->Elements->Count; $e++) {
           $element=$package->Elements->GetAt($e);
           echo "<h3>$element->Name</h3><br>";
       }

   }
}

$ea->Exit();

?>

27
General Board / Re: Use case and state diagrams
« on: December 25, 2002, 04:06:37 am »
Hi Peter,

I am interested.  Send me a private message with more details or e-mail me lonsdale@iinet.net.au

Phil

28
General Board / Re: Information about Sparx Systems
« on: December 09, 2002, 01:58:26 am »

Quote
However, as someone currently evaluating EA - I do find the "About Us" section on Sparx's website to be very limited. All they give is their contact details and some dates for establishment etc.

I'm not really looking for financial information about the company - but I would at least like to know who the main people in the company are - and a bit of background info on them.

This is pretty standard info for a company to put on their website and allows potential customers to get a "feel" for the company.


Hi Murray,

Lets be perfectly honest.  Given that Sparx is a small, innovative company, I can only see their corporate profile being used as an argument against a purchase decision by corporate management.  Better to say nothing that to give the other guys amunition.

I downloaded EA.  Evaluated it.  Read postings on this forum. Made an informed decision to use the product.

If organisations can't/won't work that way then let them suffer the financial and productivity loss.

I contrast, I recently sat through a glitzy presentation by a large vendor.  Utter rubbish!  Most of the content focussed on the personality cult of its founders, slagging off its competition and basically what good guys they were.  I also detected a fair amount of half-truths and bare-faced lies! (To avoid misunderstandings I will state quite clearly that the company involved was not Rational).

It really is up to the customer to decide which type of vendor they wish to deal with...

Phil.

29
General Board / Re: Information about Sparx Systems
« on: December 09, 2002, 01:32:52 am »

Quote
Oh, Phil... don't pre-judge EA-ReqPro... we're using VO for this first release before moving over to C# and .NET <lol>.
Steve


Steve,

Not quite sure what I said that gave the impression I pre-judged EA-ReqPro except perhaps its omission from my list of suggestions for requirements management tools.

If so, I didn't mean to create that impression.  I was listing stuff that I have had some experience with and look forward to evaluating your product on my next project.

But for the time being, were's that beer...

Phil.

30
General Board / Re: Information about Sparx Systems
« on: December 03, 2002, 06:57:29 am »
Hi Steve,

I knew that your name was familiar and now I remember I read one of your Clipper books way, way back when I did a spot of Clipper programing (even taught a Clipper course once).

Basically I agree with every word, comma and full-stop of your comments.

I have seen estimates suggesting that up to 60% of the cost of software bought from a large vendor is pre-sales.  In other words, if you actually buy the product, you pay for the glossy brochures, slick sales people's visits and free lunches supplied to all the people who DID NOT BUY THE PRODUCT.

I am guessing that Sparx's pre-sales percentage is much, much smaller than 60%.

You decide!

Phil

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6