Model Discussion

[Modesto Vega]

I am testing the Model Discussion functionality in Sparx (V13) and have a couple of questions:

• Is there a way to create a template that filters just elements with discussion items? Please note that there is no "HasDiscussions" filter on v13?
• There does not seem to be a way of editing the text on a discussion post, once I hit the enter key, either accidentally or intentionally, the text becomes read only (unless I alter it directly in the database). Have I missed something?

[Geert Bellekens]

I am testing the Model Discussion functionality in Sparx (V13) and have a couple of questions:

• There does not seem to be a way of editing the text on a discussion post, once I hit the enter key, either accidentally or intentionally, the text becomes read only (unless I alter it directly in the database). Have I missed something?

No, that even explicitly mentioned like that in the help.
Even worse, you can't even select the text once commited.

Geert

[qwerty]

I just live with the fact that EA is bloated with marketing functions which obviously are there to give sales personell a me-too argument. I just don't use them. Too bad Sparx is giving us a hard time to get rid of them. Like all those MDGs which come unwanted and just end in people using MDGs they should not. Use tools that were build for use cases you need. In this discussion case I just came up with using GUIDs to reference EA elements (of any type) to deal with outside EA and locate them back later.

q.

[bknoth2]

The sad thing is that I find the model discussion concept to be very useful, but the implementation is bizarre. How can posts be non-editable or even selectable? What are they thinking? Does Sparx use the tool?

[qwerty]

People (including me) had asked that for a long time. The same for the other "gimmicks". I also think that an internal discussion should be essential. But, repeating myself, it's nothing more than a marketing instrument. They shouldn't be wasting their time in so many things. But they do :-/

q.

[Modesto Vega]

The sad thing is that I find the model discussion concept to be very useful, but the implementation is bizarre. How can posts be non-editable or even selectable? What are they thinking? Does Sparx use the tool?

People (including me) had asked that for a long time. The same for the other "gimmicks". I also think that an internal discussion should be essential. But, repeating myself, it's nothing more than a marketing instrument. They shouldn't be wasting their time in so many things. But they do :-/

q.

I also think Model Discussions are a good feature and would like to use it, even shortcomings it currently has (if I can figure out how to get something out of it). Sparx could do better to make some of these "gimmicks" more usable.

[Modesto Vega]

The sad thing is that I find the model discussion concept to be very useful, but the implementation is bizarre. How can posts be non-editable or even selectable? What are they thinking? Does Sparx use the tool?

Regarding not being selectable, what do you mean? In V13 they are selectable and will check v15.1 shortly.

[Modesto Vega]

I have made some progress writing some code to make this a bit easier to use and document. However, not surprisingly, on the documentation side I have hit a couple of problems (not that I am too surprised).

Documentation Option 1 - Not using fragments (this is my preferred option):
- Restricting a template to exclude all packages with not elements under discussion is relatively straightforward, the following PostgreSQL query does the job :

Code: [Select]

SELECT o.package_id AS ExcludePackage
FROM t_object o
LEFT OUTER JOIN t_document d
ON d.elementid = o.ea_guid
AND doctype = 'EDisc'
WHERE o.t_object.Package_ID IN (#Branch#)
GROUP BY o.package_id
HAVING COUNT(DISTINCT d.docid) = 0
- However, filtering just those elements with discussions does not seem to be straightforward. Creating a parameterised query with a HasDiscussions parameter is also straightforward, but that query cannot be used as filter. Searches and filters - i.e., in this case element filters - are not the same thing.

Documentation Option 2 - Involves using a Document Fragment:
- The SQL to pull out the relevant data is not difficult and happy to share it. But I have not manage to identify how to retrieve the status of the discussion. Any help of this will be great.
- However Sparx EA keeps throwing an error: "missing FROM-clause for table "t_object"." And at the moment I have no idea what is causing this error. Initially, thought I had something to do with with the where clause in the fragment - i.e., where t.package_id = #PACKAGEID# - but it is not.

 

[Geert Bellekens]

Code: [Select]

WHERE o.t_object.Package_ID IN (#Branch#)This can't be right.
Shouldn't that be

Code: [Select]

WHERE o.Package_ID IN (#Branch#)
Geert

[Modesto Vega]

Yes sir, that is indeed the answer. However, Sparx (v13) behaves in a very Sparxian way,

• If Child Packages are selected the SQL excluding packages on the template does not execute under 2 conditions: 1) if there is no child packages or 2) if all child packages have been excluded from report generation.
• However, if I put the same SQL to exclude packages on the Report Specification itself (instead of the template), it always fails irrespective of the above scenario

This means that under certain conditions Sparx (v13) merrily generates documents with an incorrect SQL without throwing any errors which implies that is actually not executing the SQL.

The next 2 challenges for documentation are:
- getting the status of the discussion back

Code: [Select]

{Discussions.Status} returns nothing, I am not sure if this can corrected without an upgrade
- excluding elements without discussions from the document

[bknoth2]

The sad thing is that I find the model discussion concept to be very useful, but the implementation is bizarre. How can posts be non-editable or even selectable? What are they thinking? Does Sparx use the tool?

Regarding not being selectable, what do you mean? In V13 they are selectable and will check v15.1 shortly.

My post was a little unclear. A discussion can be selected, but selecting text within a discussion (to copy and paste, for example) doesn't seem possible. Ironically, the main reason to copy and paste a post is so if you type a post and make a mistake and want to fix it, which you can't because you can't edit it, then the natural thing to do is copy the text so you can paste it into a new post and edit that text. Well, you can't do that either! It's a frustration-escalation feature.

[Nizam]

i understand the gist of this thread is model discussions within the tool, however if I may digress a bit...
Discussions (Collaboration) has been the focus of Sparx Systems in the recent years, and I would suggest you please take a closer look at some of the recent web-based capabilities to foster model discussions between modellers and the wider community

WebEA (for modellers to discuss using a web browser)
https://sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/14.0/model_repository/discuss_webea.html

Prolaborate (for discussions or feedback from non-tech, non-EA users on diagrams and model information)
https://prolaborate.sparxsystems.com/resources/documentation/start-a-discussion

A 3 minute excerpt from Webinar illustrating model-based collaboration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg7JtsWtOEY

[Modesto Vega]

i understand the gist of this thread is model discussions within the tool, however if I may digress a bit...
Discussions (Collaboration) has been the focus of Sparx Systems in the recent years, and I would suggest you please take a closer look at some of the recent web-based capabilities to foster model discussions between modellers and the wider community

WebEA (for modellers to discuss using a web browser)
https://sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/14.0/model_repository/discuss_webea.html

Prolaborate (for discussions or feedback from non-tech, non-EA users on diagrams and model information)
https://prolaborate.sparxsystems.com/resources/documentation/start-a-discussion

A 3 minute excerpt from Webinar illustrating model-based collaboration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg7JtsWtOEY

Thanks for the links. The problem with both WebEA and Prolaborate is that they both requiere another tool being bolted on top of an Enterprise Architect repository. This means:

• Incurring additional costs
• Additional configuration
• More administration

Not every single organisation where I have used Sparx EA will be willing to incur all or some of the above.

INMHO, Sparx Systems could vastly improve how discussions are handled by Enterprise Architect without requiring the use of additional software.

Please keep in mind that Sparx EA unique selling point is that it is not only affordable but has various levels of affordability depending on which edition you buy.

The sad thing is that I find the model discussion concept to be very useful, but the implementation is bizarre. How can posts be non-editable or even selectable? What are they thinking? Does Sparx use the tool?

Regarding not being selectable, what do you mean? In V13 they are selectable and will check v15.1 shortly.

My post was a little unclear. A discussion can be selected, but selecting text within a discussion (to copy and paste, for example) doesn't seem possible. Ironically, the main reason to copy and paste a post is so if you type a post and make a mistake and want to fix it, which you can't because you can't edit it, then the natural thing to do is copy the text so you can paste it into a new post and edit that text. Well, you can't do that either! It's a frustration-escalation feature.

You are quite right and this why I started the thread. I am coming up with a couple of workarounds to help with copying and updating but they involve various degrees of database access.

Something that has become clear while working on the workarounds is that the absence of editing functionality many not be that accidental. Editing should be something only the author of a post (and a discussion can have many posts) should be able to do. Furthermore, if an administrator is to be allowed to edit discussions a full audit trail is desirable. I do not think the current implementation, including the structure of the database repository, can handle this.