Stereotypes on features and requirement diagrams

[Tad Anderson]

I would like the stereotypes I apply to features and requirement to show up on the diagrams, instead of just on the project view tree and in the generated rtm as text.  

We want a visual reprentation of the stereotype on the diagram.  

The only thing that shows up is and E or a F, but not the steriotype you apply to it.

Is there a way to get the actual stereotype you apply to the features and requirements to show up on them?

[thomaskilian]

Not sure, but the shape scripting should enable you to do that.

[nara_c]

Not sure, but the shape scripting should enable you to do that.  

I don't think this can be resolved with Shape Scripts.  I have tried to do this before but could not find a way.  

It think this is because Requirements & Features are Custom built-in stereotypes.  Therefore it appears that  their default appearence with the 'E' or 'F' seems to be hard coded rather then applied via the UML stereotypes functionality and this takes precedence over any other user defined stereotype appearences.

At best the letters can be turned off by unselecting the "Show Stereotype icons for requirements from 'Tools > Options > Objects' settings, or via properties of a specific diagram.

Work Around:
One clumsy work around that I can think of, if this visual cue is really important for your team, is to start each Requirement Short Description with the stereotype for e.g. "<<Feature>> Secure Access"

Pls, let me know if anyone has found another option.

[Oliver Michalski]

Hi,

the simplest way is: develop your own Requirement Profile

1.You can use each Stereotyped without restriction
2.Each stereotyped has its own visualization

Oliver  

[Tad Anderson]

Thanks for all the replies.  I just ended up using classes and stereotyping them accordingly.  

Not really what I wanted to do :-/ , given EA has features and requirements build in, but we need the stereotypes to show up on the diagram for analysis purposes.

[Tuser]

olmich said the right thing; do your own profile.

No matter what, I would always do this. The EA requirement handling is nice, but properitary. If you do a profile, your requirement specification is UML compliant = in principle supported by any tool (This is NOT a call for usage of other tools. We have after a long survey selected EA, because its good). Just the principe of the thing.

It also gives you absolute control of the fields in the requirements. You want each requirement to be marked with the colour of the leaves at that time of year? Just make a tagged value called 'ColurOfLeaves' and assign the value.

Only thing is that you cant order the tagged values as you want; they are always ordered alphabetically...

SysML defines a requirement profile.