Custom MDG Tagged Values Not Working in V15

[Rich Anderson]

Hi There,  I'm rather new to creating MDGs, but I have found a problem with V15 that I have reported as a bug to Sparx Systems.  The tagged values for an MDG stereotype that work just fine in V14 are not appearing in V15.   I even took Thomas Killian's Custom Bike Manufacturer test MDG  that is linked to from his book and tried it and got the same result.  Tags are not showing up in V15, which pretty much makes V15 not workable for a custom MDG.   Again, I have reported this.  Has anyone else seen this issue? 

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Hi There,  I'm rather new to creating MDGs, but I have found a problem with V15 that I have reported as a bug to Sparx Systems.  The tagged values for an MDG stereotype that work just fine in V14 are not appearing in V15.   I even took Thomas Killian's Custom Bike Manufacturer test MDG and tried it and got the same result.  Tags are not showing up in V15, which pretty much makes V15 not workable for a custom MDG.   Again, I have reported this.  Has anyone else seen this issue?

Hi Rich,

Are you sure you're looking in the right place?    In case you missed it, Tags defined in the MDG for a metatype are now considered (correctly) properties of the metatype and will appear in the Properties window Element pane, not the Tags pane.   YMMVWFM.

HTH,
Paolo

[qwerty]

I mentioned it once or twice in some threads that the term tagged value is a relict and should be stereotype property instead. I have not looked into V15 (reasons also mentioned elsewhere) but if I understand Paolo correctly here they adapted EA to the new UML wording (happy to hear that). I'll probably make an amendment to my book. Now I'm a bit more encouraged to look into V15 once again...

q.

[Rich Anderson]

Well, thanks guys.  I WAS looking in the wrong place.  I was expecting to find it in the old tags section.  I still wish that they hadn't eliminated the separate panel for tags in v15.  I think I like the way V14 handles that better.   It ought to be a user-defined option (unless I'm missing something)

[Eve]

if I understand Paolo correctly here they adapted EA to the new UML wording (happy to hear that).

I don't think we explicitly describe them as stereotype properties, but for stereotyped elements they show with the rest of the properties.

I think I like the way V14 handles that better.   It ought to be a user-defined option (unless I'm missing something)

Fair enough. We're effectively forcing a particular view, that they are just like any other property. For existing EA users it's something to get used to. For new users it will be much more natural. A new user using your profile for the first time doesn't need to know to open the "Tagged values" window. What does that have to do with <language>?

There are "Tags" left over, but they are secondary things that don't have any real meaning. They are ad-hoc, informal, unstructured etc.

[Rich Anderson]

Fair enough. We're effectively forcing a particular view, that they are just like any other property. For existing EA users it's something to get used to. For new users it will be much more natural. A new user using your profile for the first time doesn't need to know to open the "Tagged values" window. What does that have to do with <language>?

There are "Tags" left over, but they are secondary things that don't have any real meaning. They are ad-hoc, informal, unstructured etc.

I'm not sure that I buy your second sentence because sometimes those tags are just as important.  It just depends on the context.  For my situations, I use them a lot and they have plenty of meaning.  I'm not always ready (or sure) to include these in the language. It's better to see how they play out before I do that. (If I do that). In the meantime, those tags add value to getting the work done.

And, by putting these "extra" tags on a tab that I can't see at the same time that I'm looking at other tags/properties on the other tab just makes it way to hard to look at both sets at the same time and making me click back and forth.  (What a pain!) Sorry, but that is not an improvement!

[qwerty]

Rich, I think the way should be to start formalizing those left-over tags. Probably they will become nothing more than notes in the future. What (I think) has been tagged values ever were properties of stereotypes belonging to a profile designed for a particular domain - but so far not formalized. And it's good to have them in a defined place in the future since they express some (hopefully) well defined semantics. So rather on insisting to have some legacy you should start thing for what purpose you needed the tags and put them in a structure.

If you need some informal stuff you could as well attach (stereotyped) note elements to your elements rather than adding tags.

q.

[Rich Anderson]

I certainly agree that I should start formalizing the left-over tags into my MDG and I'm certainly doing that.  The problem is that by not allowing the separate tab of tags to be visible at the same time as the formalized tags in the MDG is just creating unneccesary friction in the UI when I'm coping with both (which is just about all the time).  My particular use case is using EA to configure the design of a rather complex and often arbitrary real estate ERP application. Some of my elements have upwards of 20 tags and it's not always clear which should be formal and which should not.   That's why I think the UI should offer the options to show the tags on a separate pane.  If not, I'll just use EA14. 

[Eve]

While I understand your point of view, ultimately a decision was made that this was a better way of doing things. Not only that, but that the benefit outweighed the inconvenience for people that were used to the "old way". If you're lucky a future version will add it back in. Personally I hope not.