Book a Demo

Author Topic: Activity Diagrams x Class Operarions  (Read 3401 times)

carolmika

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Activity Diagrams x Class Operarions
« on: October 10, 2006, 12:23:27 pm »
Hiya,

Does anyone know how could I create an Activity diagram related with a class Operation?
Here we have a lot of complex Operations and a simple description is not enough and we started the creation of Activity Diagrams...

Regards,
Carol

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8626
  • Karma: +259/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Activity Diagrams x Class Operarions
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2006, 01:53:16 pm »
Quote
Hiya,

Does anyone know how could I create an Activity diagram related with a class Operation?
Here we have a lot of complex Operations and a simple description is not enough and we started the creation of Activity Diagrams...

Regards,
Carol
Hi Carol,

An interesting question!

Here's a proposal that's not strict UML, but, I believe, is compatible with its general thrust.  UML used to (up to about v1.5) explicitly axiomise that a named AssociationEnd role WAS an Attribute.  In other words they were one and the same thing!  Since v2.0, I haven't really found the same axiom, but I still believe it to be so.  So we could more precisely assert that an attribute-named AssociationEnd is the attribute.

Now, one could postulate that an Association may exist between a Class and an Activity (directed from the Class to the Activity).  The destination (target) role could be named as per the operation signature (to the degree of specification required).  We could then assert that an operation-named AssociationEnd is an Operation!

Now, EA doesn't support such an assertion directly (that is if you connect an Association from a Class to the Activity - you will get a list of the Class' Operations in the Target Role drop-down).  However, you can add it in textually.

HTH,
Paolo
[size=0]©2006 Paolo Cantoni, -Semantica-[/size]
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

carolmika

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Activity Diagrams x Class Operarions
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2006, 05:49:17 am »
Hi Paolo,
Are you suggesting the association between one class and one activity, correct?
But I've to associate a Activity Diagram....

Regards,
Carol

carolmika

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Activity Diagrams x Class Operarions
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2006, 05:50:23 am »
... complementing my last post:
I want to associate a operation class to an activity diagram....

Carol

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8626
  • Karma: +259/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Activity Diagrams x Class Operations
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2006, 06:24:12 am »
Quote
... complementing my last post:
I want to associate a operation class to an activity diagram....

Carol
I think you mean a Class Operation to an Activity Diagram.

This is done indirectly.  Each activity diagram represents an activity.  So you create an activity.  You nest the Activity Diagram that is the detail of that Activity under the Activity.  You then make the Activity a Composite Element.  This will attach the Activity to its diagram.  (there will now be a little chain link symbol on the activity - if you double click the activity it will open the Activity Diagram).  You can then attach the Class to the Activity as above and you have effectively linked the Class Operation to the Diagram.  

You could link the Class to a hyperlink of the Diagram but that's not as theoretically sound as this proposal.

HTH,
Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!