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 - Glassboy

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49 ... 68
<<DataModel>> is a model stereotype. It does not relate to a diagram, to confuse matters. To reproduce follow these steps:

Using the wizard create a model using Database as the Technology and pick anything under Database Engineering. This will create a model with an stereotype of <<DataModel>>, inside 2 packages are created one called 'Logical Data Model' with no sterortype and another with <<Database>> as the stereotype for the pacakge.

Are you saying this is created using a Data Modelling MDG, presumably Database Engineering and/or Entity Relationship Diagram (see Extensions\MDG Technologies)? I so, is there a way of customising this MDG?

Ok, what you're seeing is the Database Engineering MDG, the models you can create from the wizard are all in the ModelPatterns directory prefixed with "dm".  I would not start your journey with MDGs by trying to extend any of included MDGs.  Start with something simple.

I've never actually used those wizards before and I experience a moment of nerd rage when  saw that the logical models toolbox includes tables.  Tables are a physical construct and are not a lofical artefact. 

My tip is, if you decide to migrate your repository to a new db server and version control system remove all security before you start the move :-)  Saves a lot of time.

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Find in project browser - direction
« on: April 07, 2016, 12:08:28 pm »
On a different topic it seems to me your karma is going backwards, recently I'm sure you were displayed as having 45, now you are at 15, the curious life of ...

I'm pretty sure Geert is the only one at those lofty heights.

As I've said previously (elsewhere in the forum), we're doing this, while "in flight" so it's a case of (manly) small steps.

Captain Arthur Phillip is a much older cultural reference than your norm :-)

Thanks Glassboy this clearly answers both questions and the answer is really much appreciated. This essentially means that to do what we have in mind I need 4 or 5 profiles, which is more of less what I have being suspecting all the way through this thread.

As Geert said, it's up to you.  Making some assumptions about what you're saying tho' I think you actually want one profile and several different diagram types.

Quote from: Modesto Vega
4) assumes that any model with a <<DataModel>> stererotype uses the Data Modelling profile. Anybody can confirm this?

I also don't know what you're referring to here.

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Image manager improvement
« on: April 06, 2016, 02:55:32 pm »
preach brother

1) Do I have to start the process of creating an MDG file by creating a package profile on an existing model?

No.  I recommend you start with a separate EAP file with nothing in it and use the wizard to create you the basic MDG structure.

Quote from: Modesto Vega
2) If I am using more than one profile in my project/programme and want to customise all, do I need to create a package profile for each
profile I want to use?

Each profile is saved as a separate file, as is the diagram extensions, and each set of toolboxes.

And since Sparx EA is internally self inconsistent, the AI would end up in a padded cell screaming at the universe...

There are some that believe that any AI would be born into pain.  I think this is the show where I heard it discussed 

1) Generating an MDG techology file from an existing model will not include the existing profiles associated with the various packages within a project or any customisation to any of the profiles associated with the packages

[Question: If the above is correct, what is the point of Generating an MDG technology file from an existing project]

Hi there, I think the assumption that EA can some how magically iterate your underlying meta-model is just confusing everybody.  People build MDG technologies to support a particular notation or knowledge model.  There's no facility in EA to do it for you.  EA would have to be quite an advanced AI to semantic reasoning to perform this function.

Obviously Okk! would be a more useful grammar to implement

General Board / Re: displaying attribute tags & constraints
« on: March 30, 2016, 02:24:14 pm »
Could you potentially use primitives?

Can you explain what you mean by that?


Create a primitive and place it on the diagram and use it as the Datatype for your attribute.  Then you can display whatever feature of the attribute you like with existing functionality.

General Board / Re: displaying attribute tags & constraints
« on: March 30, 2016, 02:03:31 pm »
Could you potentially use primitives?

General Board / Re: displaying attribute tags & constraints
« on: March 30, 2016, 01:47:16 pm »
So please, give me a way to somehow visualize some tagged values on the diagrams.

  • Notes
  • text elements
  • Note linked to Tagged value

As Karl Malden used to say:  "Don't leave home without it..."

I had to look that up on Wikipedia.

I think Archimate would have been better as a knowledge model and a set of style guidelines for stereotyped UML.  The Essential Project ( has also done a better job at what Archimate set out to do.

The two main problems with Archimate are that it is essentially proprietary and the people developing it are the same people trying to make money out of it, and it represents computing from the eighties.

Plus it gets all squigly in the middle when you try and model anything complex.

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49 ... 68