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 - Paolo F Cantoni

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 403
16
General Board / Re: Glossary plural terms
« on: April 18, 2018, 09:38:04 am »
Now, Now children,

Both of you go sit in the opposite corners and say sorry!   :D

You can only come out when you've agreed to behave!      ;)

I believe it was irony, Joyce.

Paolo

17
General Board / Re: 'Link' Connector type - did I imagine it ?
« on: April 17, 2018, 09:54:04 am »
Hi Ian,

IIRC, Links are instances of Associations.  As you say, they are used to link a specific instance (of a classifier) to another specific instance (of another, possibly the same, classifier).

I guess you could also use stereotyped versions to handle aggregation and composition links.

Paolo

18
Bugs and Issues / Re: Log file from XMI import
« on: April 13, 2018, 04:39:44 pm »
You are right. I overlooked that since the im-/export dialog restricts display to .xm* files (as an Apple user I'm used to see other files greyed out; hum - Windoze). Anyway, the log just tells me that everything is find while the import croaks with an error. And after close/open EA everything is imported. Time for a new bug report :-/

q.
Sparx has a conceptual problem with "logs".  They obviously didn't didn't watch Startrek (especially series 1).  Logs are to be written in real time and with a timestamp.  Otherwise, they aren't logs!  (That's why the show is interrupted with the log (to make the log)).

Paolo

19
Even something as simple as a small rectangular area at the midpoint, tail, or tip of the connector would be good enough. Would that be something we could add with a modified HTML template?
Good idea!

Submit a feature request, using the links below.

Paolo

20
General Board / Re: element icon size matters
« on: April 13, 2018, 09:49:29 am »
Those "icons" are often written via the shapescript as "decorations".  Check the Help.  Decorations retain their standard size regardless of the size of the element.

We do it all the time.

HTH,
Paolo

21

That resolved all of my issues (at least those related to Sparx EA  :)  Thanks, Aaron!
As they say about the weather in Melbourne (not far from where EA is developed), just wait a few minutes, that will change.  ;)

Happy Friday everybody!

Paolo

22
General Board / Re: EA V14? Is now the EA Application Modal?
« on: April 13, 2018, 09:42:14 am »
Mine's OK, on Windows 7 - we're only testing on one machine at present.

Paolo

23
It would be useful to add to the "Insert Related Elements" Connector types and Element types, a filter on Stereotypes e.g. to select "ABC" stereotyped classes that are associated with the current element.
It would also make sense to include the Stereotype on the Field chooser.
Metatypes too, please!  We're trying to wean our users off stereotypes - which in our MDG are quite cryptic and move them to metatypes.

Paolo

24
I don't think the definition of System of Record above has much to do with the "of record" part.

From the descriptions (and they ARE descriptions - since they describe some properties, but you can't use the properties to classify) it may be that they were thinking of
"Recording Systems vs Differentiating Systems vs Innovating Systems", but just because you are a Recording System, it doesn't (ipso facto) make you a "System of Record".  Just as "an Officer of a Statutory Entity" is not necessarily a "Statutory Officer".
Agree with you 100% - was just pointing out how the term "System of Record" can be confused as major consulting firms coin phrases which muddy the water.
(my emphasis)
Yes, I took that point, but wanted to emphasise it as I wanted to combat "Nobody got fired for buying/following <insert vendor/consultancy of choice>".

I no longer expect better from "the experts".

In this game, "Rigour is your friend".

Paolo

25
Bugs and Issues / TAM- confusing UI
« on: April 12, 2018, 04:47:51 pm »
Following some feedback on TAM - Incorrect item cloned! Sparx advised that: "Time-aware versions can be built sequentially, but not in parallel."

What this means is that if you have an item that has been cloned, you should not be able to clone it again!  Indeed, this appears to be the case.  However, the UI doesn't indicate this.  The "Clone Element as New Version..." context menu item is still enabled for the original item.

Furthermore, executing the menu item will replace the original item on the diagram with the latest clone.  I say the latest clone because if there is a chain of (say 5 items each one cloned from its predecessor), and you are selecting the first (original) item, the original item will be replaced by the fifth item.  Note further, that I said replaced, not cloned, since NO cloning has, in fact, taken place!  Now, to be clear, I have no problem with the end result (if that's what I understood would happen- - given "sequential only" cloning).  Once the latest clone has been inserted into the diagram, executing the "Clone Element as New Version..." a second time will NOW create a new (in this case 6th item)!

The concept of Time-Aware Modelling is difficult enough without confusing matters further by using the wrong terminology so that the unexpected happens (AND you can't reverse the effects once you've executed the menu item!).

Now, the "Clone Element as New Version..." menu item can be disabled by EA for a variety of circumstances (still to be fully investigated by us), so it's not as if EA can't work out when to enable/disable the item.  In some cases, the "Clone Element as New Version..." is enabled, but when you execute it, nothing seems to happen.  That would suggest that it should have been disabled.

In the case of the chained clones above, selecting any item other than the latest clone should enable the "Replace Element with Latest Version" (replacement) menu item.

In an enterprise setting, anyone may have created the diagram you are working on at any time in the past, you (AFAIK) have NO visual indication that the item you  are wanting to clone has already been cloned, so it is vital that you are assisted by the system in understanding what will happen if you execute the menu item.

Reported,
Paolo

26
Bugs and Issues / Re: TAM - Incorrect item cloned!
« on: April 12, 2018, 03:53:00 pm »
Sparx replied more formally, once they were able to see the issue:

Our developers advised that this is the intended behavior. Time-aware versions can be built sequentially, but not in parallel. You can find the sequential relationships in the traceability window.

As far as we're concerned, We need to be able to clone in parallel.  You have multiple options which you need to model simultaneously.  Only one (or none) of which will "get the guernsey".  we're still investigating if we can do it by enhancing the standard functionality.

Paolo


27
Bugs and Issues / v14Beta: Issues with MDG profiles
« on: April 12, 2018, 01:55:25 pm »
Something has gone horribly wrong with MDG management in build 1415.

Attempting to load/unload an MDG (even standard ones) in 1415 will cause a crash.

The MDG patterns for the projects we have in 13.5 are no longer visible in the Package creation dialog (Model Wizard). They used to be visible right at the end of the list, but now aren't there at all!

The Toolbox management process also ignores the MDG supplied toolbox configuration profiles - they are no longer visible on the list (More Tools... in 1352).

Because this is missing, we can't work around a caching bug we have found with the toolbox profile itself. We thought this was an exclusively v14 bug, but we have found the issue with 1352 also.
When we changed the profile (for example changing the isCollapsed status of a toolbox section), this would not be reflected in the toolbox. However, we have discovered that it's a caching problem since (under 1352) if we reselect the profile via the "More Tools...", the "Correct" toolbox (as opposed to the "Cached" toolbox) could be made to appear.

Interestingly, exiting EA and reentering DOES NOT show the "correct" toolbox, but the original "cached" toolbox.

Consequently, since we can't reset the profile (since it's not visible on the list) we can't use v14! EAUI rearing its head?

Reported,
Paolo

[Edit: Oh, I forgot...  You also can't add a diagram type that's specified in the profile. The New Diagram dialog doesn't include the list of Profile diagrams.]

28
EA scripting editor works nicely (I use VBScript), yet a few enhancements would be nice to reach other scripting tools.
- Provide a collapse/expand commands (+/-)  on functions and routines
- Drop down list of functions and routines (as it's done when opening source code)

Could this be added in a future EA build?
+1

Paolo

29
FYI Gartner has something called pace layering which describes three types of system.

Systems of Record Established packaged applications or legacy homegrown systems that support core transaction processing and manage the organization's critical master data. The rate of change is low, because the processes are well-established and common to most organizations, and often are subject to regulatory requirements.

Systems of Differentiation Applications that enable unique company processes or industry-specific capabilities. They have a medium life cycle (one to three years), but need to be reconfigured frequently to accommodate changing business practices or customer requirements.

Systems of Innovation New applications that are built on an ad hoc basis to address new business requirements or opportunities. These are typically short life cycle projects (zero to 12 months) using departmental or outside resources and consumer-grade technologies.

Reference https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/1923014
I don't think the definition of System of Record above has much to do with the "of record" part.

From the descriptions (and they ARE descriptions - since they describe some properties, but you can't use the properties to classify) it may be that they were thinking of
"Recording Systems vs Differentiating Systems vs Innovating Systems", but just because you are a Recording System, it doesn't (ipso facto) make you a "System of Record".  Just as "an Officer of a Statutory Entity" is not necessarily a "Statutory Officer".

Paolo

30
That's an interesting take.  My definition of a system of record is somewhat simpler, but the end result, I think, is close to yours.

I believe (without actual proof - but else why coin it?) that the term "System of Record" derives from the epithet "Newspaper of Record" - such as is/was applied to the Washington Post, the Times of London etc.  These newspapers are so designated because they are general purpose "and their editorial and news-gathering functions are considered comprehensive, professional and typically authoritative".  In addition, should one wish to access information about a past event, one can consult their archives and determine the "facts" at that point in time.  That is, they create factual records and retain them for later consultation.

There's a simple test for that proposition and the answer seems to be no :-)  https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=system+of+record%2C+newspaper+of+record&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Csystem%20of%20record%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cnewspaper%20of%20record%3B%2Cc0
Interesting, but I strongly suspect that the meaning then (the 1800s) is not the meaning now (we need a system of record for the epithet, "System of Record"  ;))

Seriously, though, I do suspect a change in meaning over time.  Like the word "Naughty", for example.

Quote
Quote
From my point of view, a System of Record needs to be able to hold past data and how that data (or the understanding of that data) has evolved via any appropriate state episodes.  So far, this corresponds with your "capturing data about entities or events that relate to something the organisation has to do".

Now where I think I align with your view is that as the facts to be held (one could say the "editorial and news-gathering functions") need to change because the environment or context changes and the system doesn't change accordingly, it can no longer be accorded the epithet "System of Record", since it can no longer record the necessary facts.

How's that sound?  I'd like to come to a useful definition because I can then add it to our Ontological Model and use it to educate our modellers, architects and users.

In that it may only contain a subset or cause a perceptual problem (such as believing monotremes are no different than other mammals).
That last sentence isn't clear to me.  can you elaborate?

Paolo

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 403