Conceptual data modeling in EA?

[dana n]

For data modeling, it seems like EA is mostly geared toward logical and physical design.

Oracle Designer, and other products like it, allow you to start out with conceptual design, progressing to logical and physical design.

Is it possible to do conceptual data design, using Entity-Relationship (ER) diagrams, then transform to logical design? Can it do this out of the box, or is there a free add-in for this?

Or am I stuck simply doing the logical data model, then striking out the display of what I don't want to see to make it look more like conceptual data modeling?

Thanks.

Dana

[Paul Lotz]

Dana,

I'm not a terrific expert, but it sounds to me like you want to create a domain model, which is something Craig Larman describes in his book (http://www.amazon.com/Applying-UML-Patterns-Introduction-Object-Oriented/dp/0131489062/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213374432&sr=8-1) in chapters 9 (Domain Models) and 31 (Domain Model Refinement).  I think the keys here are to use conceptual classes in a class diagram with abstract attributes and associations between conceptual classes (e.g., SalesLineItem Records-sale-of Item, and so on).  This is quite doable with EA.

Is this what you want to do?

Paul

[dana n]

Thanks Paul.

That might work. Would love to see a sample project using this technique.

Dana

[«Midnight»]

Dana (and Paul of course),

Check out the help pages - or the feature pages on the Sparx site - that refer to data modeling. You'll find the name and authors of the profile. Then look up the book - there's really only one that goes into it in detail - that defines the profile.

You might have trouble finding a copy. It was out of print for a few years, and I don't think it has come back. That said, I got one when it was first published, so I don't really pay attention to it's current availability. Perhaps it has been released again in soft or hard copy. And you'd likely find it in a good technical or public library.

This is a profile that came out of Rational - I'm pretty sure it dates back to near or before the time IBM acquired them. It was certainly not a standard, and it left some loose ends, but it was a pretty good start at the time. Until we see something more rigorous, something that actually gets standardized, this is likely the best we can do.

Sparx has taken this thing somewhat beyond its original bounds, but it certainly suffers from some legacy limitations. I can understand why Sparx does not put too much effort into adding more here, since sooner or later it will all have to be replaced (when a standard does come along).

Some time ago the OMG was moving in this direction. For quite a while there's been no public word, but these things often move very slowly.

David

PS: I'm not suggesting you read the whole book to discover any great revelations. But a quick scan will give you an idea where the original authors were coming from, which will help you understand why the Sparx implementation works the way it does. The good news is that the book is fairly well written, and not overly thick.

[dana n]

Dana (and Paul of course),

Check out the help pages - or the feature pages on the Sparx site - that refer to data modeling. You'll find the name and authors of the profile. Then look up the book - there's really only one that goes into it in detail - that defines the profile.
...
This is a profile that came out of Rational - I'm pretty sure it dates back to near or before the time IBM acquired them. It was certainly not a standard, and it left some loose ends, but it was a pretty good start at the time. Until we see something more rigorous, something that actually gets standardized, this is likely the best we can do.
The good news is that the book is fairly well written, and not overly thick.

Thanks David!

Haven't been able to find the title of the book you mention. I looked here:

* http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/products/ea/features.html

* http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/resources/uml_datamodel.html (mentions that the profile came from Rational)

"We will conclude with a review of the UML Data Profile (as proposed by Rational Software)."

* http://www.sparxsystems.com/resources/developers/uml_profiles.html

* http://www.sparxsystems.com/uml_tool_guide/data_modeling/datamodelling2.html

No mention of the book in the above. Did I miss something (that's my guess!) or has the reference to the book been removed over time?

Although the last URL does state:

"The UML Data Modeling Profile is not currently a ratified standard; however it has wide industry support and is a useful method for bridging the gap between the UML and conventional relational database modeling."

Thanks again.

Dana

[Dermot]

I have not read the detailed replies here, but I  assume you are aware of the MDA transforms from the PIM (Platform Independant Model) to the Physical model for DDL - See:
http://www.sparxsystems.com/resources/mda/ddl_transformation.html
This page does refer to the PIM as the 'Logical model' ... I am not sure this is correct as it would be defined in the 'Domain Model'. I will request a correction on this.

[Eve]

Dermot, I'm not sure I agree with your comment on the domain model.

To me, a 'Domain Model' would be another word/phrase to describe 'Computational Independent Model'.  It is describing the domain without attempting to break it up into useful classes.  A platform independent model is where you start to look at the kind of data you want and the classes that will contain them.  This would certainly be classified as a type of logical model.

[Geert Bellekens]

I think you should be very careful when using the "Domain model" as it is a term that has different meanings by different authors/communities.
(see http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?DomainModel)
I find the definition : "A DomainModel is an object model of a problem domain." a pretty good one.
In this case the problem domain could be your business (Computation Independent Model), your system on a conceptual/abstract level (Platform Independant Model) or even a data model or an exact representation of the code. (Platform Specific Model) .
So I think it would be wrong to place the domain model on one of the specific layers in MDA. The term is just too general for that purpose.

just my 2  € cents.

Geert

[Dermot]

Thanks Simon and Geert, point taken.
It seems there are many variations on the usage of these terms.

[salayande]

The reference to Designer 2000 suggests to me that what the original enquirer meant is a traditional ER conceptual data model (Oracle CASE Method, a type of Information Engineering method) diagrams made popular by David C. Hays (Data Model Patterns) and Len Silverston (The Data Model Resource Books Vol 1-3). If my assumption is correct, then, I have some good news.

The good news is that you can create those diagrams easily and especially the data object (business entities) hierarchies. You will require the Zachman MDG Add-In which supports data object nesting and Information Engineering notation. It may already exist in your installation depending on which type of licence you hold. I have used it to define an enterprise information portfolio (classification scheme)


kind regards

Segun

[«Midnight»]

...It may already exist in your installation depending on which type of licence you hold...

Actually, I think that should read "...you may already be licensed for it..."

AIUI a couple of the 'upper' end versions of EA include the license. You still have to download and install the MDG Technology. Once done the Technology will work fine, since you have the license as part of your EA version. This can trip you up if you don't have a version of EA that predates 7.5 and never had the technology installed locally.

I think you can still purchase the MDG Technology for use with (as an example) the Professional edition of EA. Or you can continue to use a prior version of the MDG Technology if you have it. But given the price difference between EA editions and the other features bundled with the upper-level editions it might be worth upgrading EA instead.