Indicate collection for operation parameter on diagram

[Paul Lotz]

I did a search on "operation parameter array" and found many threads  going back to 2009 discussing the same issue (including one I commented on in 2014), but I didn't see any threads with direct requests for a change, so I am creating one.

Among many others, these threads capture the issue and some workarounds:
http://sparxsystems.com/forums/smf/index.php/topic,7730.msg136609.html#msg136609
http://sparxsystems.com/forums/smf/index.php/topic,17799.msg172583.html#msg172583.

Naturally, I would prefer that the tool work implement a display feature rather than using a workaround. I did find some examples on line that did show the feature (e.g., http://www.uml-diagrams.org/operation.html), although I didn't find anything specific about this in the UML 2.5 specification.

The feature request is to be able to indicate on a diagram that an operation parameter is a collection (an array, for example) based on the multiplicity settings (much as EA already does for class attributes). (Presently EA permits one to configure multiplicity, but there is no representation of this on a diagram.)

Paul

[Geert Bellekens]

Paul,

I guess you better send in a feature request at OMG to adjust the UML notation to accommodate this.

As long as UML doesn't do it I'm pretty sure EA won't either.

Geert

[Paul Lotz]

Fair enough.

(The referenced section below -- 9.4.4 -- actually does indicate that the notation should include [’[’<multiplicity-range>’]’], but the document could be clearer about what this means.)

Done:

Clarify diagram notation for collection parameters in operation

Unified Modeling Language Version 2.5 specification

9.4.4 Notation, p. 108

Please clarify the notation diagram for indicating that an operation parameter is a collection (e.g., array). Some tools do not indicate this on the diagram, but simply indicate the base type. It is unclear to me, at least, if the specification really requires anything else. It would seem to be appropriate for a future version of the specification to require this and to specify the manner in which this appears.

[qwerty]

OMG has a feedback page where you can send in request/criticism/errors. But I found this rather a black hole unless you know someone inside OMG to take personal care. Why does that remind me on Sparx error reporting? Hmmm.

q.