Creating a Profile - 'Extending' Relationships

[wikitect]

New using the tool and immediately dropped self into the murky waters of trying to create a UML profile. Please bear with me if I use the wrong terminology.

I can see how to get to the point where a stereotype extends a metaclass.

What I'm trying to do is to create a model of a framework. I can see how I can get 2 metaclasses, what I now need is to define the connector (graphical path) that relates the 2 metaclasses (graphical objects) using a type of association which I want to name. e.g. I want to constrain things such that View and Viewpoint are related by 'conformsTo'.

I'm confused whether a) I need to create a metaclass to represent this relationship and, if so, how to connect the 2 metaclases using it or, b) whether I just use a standard UML relationship (in which case this seems to be separate from the relationships shown on the Profile Toolbar).

[KP]

I want to constrain things such that View and Viewpoint are related by 'conformsTo'.

If you want to enforce this (disallow any other relationship type between these two element types), you will have to write an add-in. Instructions in the help if you fancy going down that path. Otherwise, you can "make it easy to use the correct relationship type" by defining quicklinks for your profile. Again, instructions in the help.

I'm confused whether a) I need to create a metaclass to represent this relationship

One of the benefits is that it will appear in the Link Type list box for the Relationship Matrix.

and, if so, how to connect the 2 metaclases using it

Quicklinks, Relationship Matrix, Toolbox, all the usual ways.

or, b) whether I just use a standard UML relationship (in which case this seems to be separate from the relationships shown on the Profile Toolbar).

You can put standard (unstereotyped) UML elements in your profile toolbox by defining a custom toolbox profile. Instructions in the help file.

[wikitect]

If you want to enforce this (disallow any other relationship type between these two element types), you will have to write an add-in. Instructions in the help if you fancy going down that path. Otherwise, you can "make it easy to use the correct relationship type" by defining quicklinks for your profile. Again, instructions in the help.

By add-in do you mean a MDG one? Looking for clues where to find the relevant help page in order to assess how difficult this is going to be. I'd like to constrain folks to reduce the scope for errors / non-conformity.

Daft question. Any profile must ultimately extend a UML class, presumably. I assume that this is what I'm presented with in terms of a pick list when adding a metaclass to a profile. How much work is involved in using a profile created by EA (some of which are probably an EA feature, some are probably limitations of XMI) - is there anything that gives guidance on what does/doesn't transfer well?

Tx

[KP]

By add-in do you mean a MDG one? Looking for clues where to find the relevant help page in order to assess how difficult this is going to be. I'd like to constrain folks to reduce the scope for errors / non-conformity.

Look in the help under "SDK for Enterprise Architect". The two relevant sections are "Enterprise Architect Object Model" and "Enterprise Architect Add-In Model".