Different representations (notations) for one (1) Diagram Element

[Viking]

Hello together,

This issue is not new. But I lost the status of the current discussion resp. the link.

I want to use an item (an application) in the project browser in 2 viewpoints. Nothing special. But the two viewpoints are based on two different notations. The first one is based on UML and represents the application as a component. The second one is based on BPMN and respresents the application as a swimlane (please do not discuss if this makes sense).

This is the reason why I cannot use the item in the project browser in both viewpoints. I cannot change the representation of the application.

There are several suggestions in the internet, e.g. using trace between the different representations. The problem with this is, that this would make examinations complicated. I would have two applications in the database, but in fact I have only one. And I would have a lot of references without a useful meaning and only due the limitations of a tool.

Is there a solution now available in the current or next version (13) of EA?

Best regards

V

[qwerty]

I don't think there is a solution since your problem seems to be a result of wrong thinking. If I have something that look different from different aspects I need to picture (diagram) these two aspects. But in itself it's one and the same. The browser is meant to show the individuals. The diagrams are used to show the different perspectives. You want to be the browser to behave as diagram. This is not right.

q.

[Viking]

Dear qwerty,

Many thanks for your answer.

I checked my thinking and its still working sufficently   The issue can be compared with MVC. In MVC I have different Views of the same model. The model keeps the same, even I had hundreds of views on it representing it in different ways (e.g. a pie chart and a column).

Replace View with Diagram and model with item in the project browser. The application in my case is still the same. And in fact it does not look differently. It just looks differently because I stick to notations (standards, which is welcome). I still show the same application. I think it should be possible to rightclick an element in a diagram and change the representation. I now, the EA-database is designed differently. For my opinion there is also potential of wrong thinking.

V

[PeterHeintz]

A model or a model element typically represents something from the real world, having attributes and notations regarded as relevant to describe the real world. These attributes and notations are somehow the language you have chosen to describe the real thing.

If you use more than one language to describe the real thing, you have one real thing but more model things describing the one and only real thing.
If you have more than one description of one thing and you want to make that explicit you need to link those two somehow.

There is no concept in UML to mix languages on element level, you only can extend something, quiet similar to that, there is no notation defined (AFAIK) to mix English, Chinese and Bhotia in one sentence.

[Viking]

Dear Peter,

Many thanks for your answer.

Here some replys:

"A model or a model element typically represents something from the real world, having attributes and notations regarded as relevant to describe the real world. These attributes and notations are somehow the language you have chosen to describe the real thing." -> there must be a misunderstanding. A model in MVC represtents the "real thing". It exists only once. The views are just different "pictures" about the same thing.

"If you use more than one language to describe the real thing, you have one real thing but more model things describing the one and only real thing." -> exactly. Language <-> Notation <-> Viewpoint.

"If you have more than one description of one thing and you want to make that explicit you need to link those two somehow." -> yes. I am talking about the same thing in different languages. But it is still the same thing. Even if I would describe it completely different.

"There is no concept in UML" -> UML? I am using UML, Archimate, BPMN.

"to mix languages on element level" -> I do NOT mix them. That's the reason why I have this problem. I am using differnt viewpoint (e.g. Business Process and System Landscape) based on diffent notiations (e.g. BPMN and UML)  showing the same things (e.g. an Application as a Lane and as a Comonent).

"you only can extend something, quiet similar to that, there is no notation defined (AFAIK) to mix English, Chinese and Bhotia in one sentence." -> see above

V

[Viking]

For clarification: I need to evaluate the database (as part of EAM). That's why I have to be shure that assets (Building Blocks) are only once in the database. Scripts can identify dublicates, but they have to be maintained and integrated in EA. I prefer using the capabilities of Sparx EA only.

[PeterHeintz]

Hi Viking,
I still belief that you have the wrong mindset. Maybe I am wrong, but at least your mindset is not helpful in the UML context or for using any UML tool around this globe.

For sure although in MVC the model is not the real thing. There are a lot of models representing a person like you, somehow stored e.g. in a sql table. But the table contains attributes of persons, but you as real person are (hopefully) not imprisoned in such a SQL table.

There are lots of such kinds of tables/models in lots of applications and some attributes are very similar, others are very different. Lots of such tables/models could represent the same real person (maybe you).

I assume you would not expect that any of those applications you can mix in your view out of the box (without some kind of programming), aren’t you?

In typically applications it would make not much since having more than on table representing persons, but in UML your “applications” are more or less UML, SysML, Archimate, BPMN just being able to be stored on one DB for some good reasons.

PS.: When I use UML I am talking depneding on context about two different things, not always saying what I am talking about in a specific context (1. UML modeling language and 2. UML as profile language). So in the second context BPMN e.g. is also somehow UML.

[qwerty]

If two people tell you "you are wrong" it is not a proof that you are wrong. But it's a good indication to sit down and revise your own point of view rather than insisting on your standpoint.

q.

[Viking]

For sure although in MVC the model is not the real thing. There are a lot of models representing a person like you, somehow stored e.g. in a sql table. But the table contains attributes of persons, but you as real person are (hopefully) not imprisoned in such a SQL table.

Yes, agreed. My explanations where misleading. Maybe it becomes clearer with that: I would like to have my person just once in the database. There is only one. I can reuse an entry in the project browser several times as diagram elements. There is no need to copy it. But because I want to represent an application as a lane in one diagram and as a component in the other I need two entries in the project browser. I have to create a doublet. If I could change the representation (picture) of the element in the diagram there would be no need to create a doublet.

To summarize it, there would be no need to create doublets if EA would allow to change icons in the diagram. So the need to create doublets is tool dependant and not because I need it for my models.

[Viking]

If two people tell you "you are wrong" it is not a proof that you are wrong. But it's a good indication to sit down and revise your own point of view rather than insisting on your standpoint. q.

I do not insist on my viewpoint. I just have the impression that we are talking about different things.

[qwerty]

I remember some discussion where rendering of an element was asked to be different in various diagrams. Is it that what you are asking for?

q.

[Viking]

I remember some discussion where rendering of an element was asked to be different in various diagrams. Is it that what you are asking for? q.

YES (it sounds like that) ! Thank you for clarification.

[qwerty]

The outcome of that discussion was to stereotype the diagrams and evaluate the diagram stereotype in the shape script of the element so it renders in different ways.

http://sparxsystems.com/forums/smf/index.php/topic,30888.msg224332.html#msg224332

q.

[Viking]

The outcome of that discussion was to stereotype the diagrams and evaluate the diagram stereotype in the shape script of the element so it renders in different ways. http://sparxsystems.com/forums/smf/index.php/topic,30888.msg224332.html#msg224332 q.

Thank you very much! I will try it out.

Another question. I am sure that you can answer this as well: is it possible to dublicate a diagram-element in one diagram (e.g. an application is shown twice because it is used in different process steps)? This would be also very helpful for EAM. I heard that this is possible from Version 11 on. I am not talking about instances.

[qwerty]

Well, there is a way with so-called virtualized connectors (search the help). That will create an element stub more than once in a diagram. Personally I would not use them since it introduces more issues than it might solve. But that's my POV.

q.

P.S. The help only links to this: http://sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/12.1/automation_and_scripting/diagram2.html Look for virtualized below in that