Book a Demo

Author Topic: Association in Quick Linker  (Read 4557 times)

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8626
  • Karma: +259/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Association in Quick Linker
« on: May 17, 2006, 05:25:38 am »
I'm still using 789 as we've expired our support (temporarily I hope).

When you use Quick-Linker, there appears to be NO distinction in outcome between Association and Directed Association.

In this case, one would expect that (unqualified) Association would be a synonym for Undirected Association.

Has this been fixed in 790?  There was no mention on the release information.

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

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Association in Quick Linker
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2006, 05:30:04 am »
I still don't see a difference Paolo. They both seem to produce a directed association, in the direction that the user dragged the quick linker.

David
No, you can't have it!

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8626
  • Karma: +259/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Association in Quick Linker
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2006, 05:50:53 am »
Quote
I still don't see a difference Paolo. They both seem to produce a directed association, in the direction that the user dragged the quick linker.

David
Thanx, David.

So, to paraphrase a (now deceased) famous Aussie comedian:

"It's a bug, ".

If Simon doesn't pick it up from here, I'll report it tomorrow.

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

Eve

  • EA Administrator
  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8110
  • Karma: +119/-20
    • View Profile
Re: Association in Quick Linker
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2006, 03:03:11 pm »
Well, it works correctly for me, but I can also tell you why.

The (unqualified) Association is behaving exactly as Association does when dragged from the toolbox.   This default association has an option allowing the direction to be "Source -> Destination" by default.

The option is on the Objects page and labelled "Association default = source --> target".

«Midnight»

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 5651
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • That nice Mister Grey
    • View Profile
Re: Association in Quick Linker
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2006, 03:10:14 pm »
Thanks Simon,

That's one of those things that makes so much sense that I never would have thought of it - Mom always said there'd be those days.

And of course, I usually have that option unchecked. But for the last few months I've been working on something where all untyped associations are directed, so have checked the box and forgotten about it.

Life goes on,
David
No, you can't have it!

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8626
  • Karma: +259/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: Association in Quick Linker
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2006, 03:42:55 pm »
Quote
Well, it works correctly for me, but I can also tell you why.

The (unqualified) Association is behaving exactly as Association does when dragged from the toolbox.   This default association has an option allowing the direction to be "Source -> Destination" by default.

The option is on the Objects page and labelled "Association default = source --> target".
Thanks for clearing that up.

However, with respect, that means that the UI is not optimal.  If that checkbox is set, then the UI should read
Association & Undirected Association.  If not set, then it should read Association & Directed Association.

It may be easier to have the Quick Linker just formally have Directed and Undirected Associations (thus ignoring the setting).

The reason I suggest this is that the setting is (Toyota) buggered anyway.  If I unset it, EA still draws BPMN Associations as directed.  Which - even if EA has (for its own reasons) decided to use a Dependency for a BPMN Association, is contrary to the user intent and inconsistent this Class diagram behaviour.

Paolo

« Last Edit: May 17, 2006, 03:44:23 pm by PaoloFCantoni »
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!