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 - Larry Tubbs

Pages: [1]
1
General Board / Re: Sequence Diagrams and underlined object names
« on: February 17, 2003, 03:39:24 pm »
Whoops, my bad.  This appears to be a bug.  When I drag an instance to an activity diagram, it is correctly underlined to indicate it is an instance.  But, when dragging an instance to a sequence diagram, the classname is not underlined.  The : is prefaced, but the underlining is not there.  Sorry.

--Lar

2
General Board / Re: Sequence Diagrams and underlined object names
« on: February 17, 2003, 03:33:16 pm »
Ah, you have auto-instancing turned off.  Just hold down Ctrl while you drag and drop your class and you'll get the exact behavior you are looking for.

--Lar

3
General Board / Re: Sequence Diagrams and underlined object names
« on: February 17, 2003, 12:52:09 pm »
If you drag the objects from the "Object" tool in the toolbox, the name will be underlined.  But, when you drag from an existing class, you are dragging a class.  This is why the name is not underlined.

I'm assuming when you are dragging from the logical model you are either getting an instance of the Class or the Class itself (depending on the instancing setting).  But when you create an object from the toolbox, you are not creating a class, but a higher level "Object" object.  A class might realize this object, but I think in the dynamic model, this "Object" could be higher level than the actual implemented class.

I hope this makes sense.  I'm also new to EA, and this is how I understand it.  If it doesn't work this way, perhaps someone will correct me.

--Lar

4
Uml Process / Re: The best way to write use cases?
« on: February 15, 2003, 11:32:14 am »
Ah, I see.  You are using the word "Actor" rather than the name of the actor doing the action.  That would be much more generic.  That works.  Thanks,

--Lar

5
Uml Process / Re: The best way to write use cases?
« on: February 15, 2003, 05:49:09 am »
This really is a great discussion. It looks like it was put to bed some time ago, but I have to make one comment. Fintan said:

"I avoid the word 'user' in use case texts and always specify the actor name."

I actually avoid the use of the Actor name in favor of "user" allowing relationships to define which actors can use the use case.

-Lar

6
Uml Process / Re: Use Case Alternatives
« on: February 18, 2003, 05:13:32 am »
Jaime,

I'll definitely experiment with what you are suggesting.  In situations where I know I'm going to have a sequence diagram for a particular path anyway, it does seem to make good sense to go ahead and make one, even during the "high-level" design stage since EA can generate the event list off of it.

I've got a situation right now on a project where I needed to get to the CRUD level on one particular use case (the business owner provided a much higher level of detail than normal in their requirements with regard to a single algorithm).  I've already detailed it out with a scenario, but I think I'll do a sequence diagram as well and compare the results.

Thanks for the discussion and the suggestions.  If this works out, it will save a lot of time and make the model easier to maintain.  Thanks again,

--Lar

7
Uml Process / Re: Use Case Alternatives
« on: February 15, 2003, 05:31:18 am »
Jaime, you asked,

"So why bother in writing detailed scenarios?"

One of the main uses of use cases for me is to bridge the gulf between the tech guys and the business owners on a particular project. If I need the business guys to be able to read, understand and approve of a particular piece of functionality, it gets a scenario. Even if that means taking the scenario to the CRUD level. So, basically I agree in the majority of circumstances that "detailed" scenarios are not needed. Again, it comes back to being all about the audience and what they need to know.

So, that begs the question, "What do they need to know?" My simplified answer is if not knowing and approving something could cause an interface change down the road, then they need to know. of course this is a rule of thumb and doesn't apply everywhere; YMMV.

-Lar

8
Uml Process / Re: Use Case Alternatives
« on: February 14, 2003, 01:38:20 pm »
Fred,

I'm a new guy here so please keep that in mind.  But it has been my experience that you should go down as far as you think you'd have to go for the audience of your use case to be satisfied with the implementation.  If it is important that the audience know something, you include it.  If not, don't.

I frequently design use cases at a very high level for user sign-off.  But, I then design "technical" use cases that drill into much more detailed scenarios for consumption by implementers.

I hope this makes sense,

--Lar

Pages: [1]