WARNING: Use Link versus a «use» Dependency Link

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Contrary to the Help file (see under topic Use), a Use Link (incorrectly denoted UseCase Link in the product itself) is NOT the same as a Dependency link with the «use» stereotype.  Two different renderings result and the properties are designated differently.

Took me a fair while to figure out why one was on the Relationship Matrix and the other wasn't!

My view is that one should use the Use link for a usage, in preference to a «use» Dependency.  Thoughts anyone?

Consistency, consistency, consistency!^(TM)

Paolo

[Paolo F Cantoni]

My view is that one should use the Use link for a usage, in preference to a «use» Dependency.  Thoughts anyone?

I've now checked the UML 2 specification.  There doesn't seem to be a mention of the Use(Case) link implemented by EA.  So I'll stick with the explicitly defined Usage Dependency - a Dependency with «use» Stereotype.

Paolo

[Kevin Brennan]

<<use>> has been removed from UML 2.0--only <<extends>> and <<includes>> are valid in that version.

<<includes>> is the closest in meaning, as it indicates that the included use case is treated as a part of the calling use case.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

<<use>> has been removed from UML 2.0--only <<extends>> and <<includes>> are valid in that version.

<<includes>> is the closest in meaning, as it indicates that the included use case is treated as a part of the calling use case.

Thanks Kevin,

I'd surmised as much.

However, the Use link in the Help is shown between the Actor and the Use Case - so it shouldn't be a dependency anyway.  In UML 2 (and other products) it's ans Association.

Paolo