Message in Sequence Diagram

[pakcom]

Hi guys!

I have problem in sequence diagram. It’s because I can’t find the right structure for it.

I have three components (ComponentA, ComponentB, and Component C). And I also have two interfaces (Interface1 and Interface2). Interface1 has two operation, AB_1 and AB_2. Interface2 also has two operations, AC_1 and AC_2. ComponentA realizes those two interfaces. ComponentB is dependent to Interface1 while ComponentC is dependent to Interface2.



In the sequence diagram, I draw line from ComponentB and ComponentC to ComponentA. When I select operation for message line from ComponentB, I want to only see operation AB_1 and AB_2 option in message properties. For message from ComponentC, I want to see only operation AC_1 and AC_2 option.
Is it possible to set it that way?
Right now, as you may know, all operation is visible in message properties.



I know that my design structure is not correct. That’s why I want to ask in this forum. How to set the relationship to limit visibility of operation options in sequence diagram?

Thank you.

[Makulik]

You can show the lifelines of embedded elements (i.e. your interfaces) with your component and send messages to the appropriate interface directly. You should have the interfaces as provided interfaces of the component (rather than using the realization relationship).

HTH
Günther

[pakcom]

Thank you for your reply.
That condition is only example. What I need to show in the sequence is the communication between components (not component to interface)
Because ComponentA may realizes more than one interface, and ComponentB or ComponentC may be dependent to more than one interface also.

[Makulik]

If you follow my proposal, you'll see separate lifelines for the various interfaces that are exposed (realized) by a component, so what's your problem with this approach?
It'll look like the example shown here:
http://www.sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/9.3/standard_uml_models/inline_sequence_elements.html

IMHO that's exactly what you want, components should solely communicate via interfaces.

Best regards,
Günther

[Geert Bellekens]

I think indeed you should use the interfaces and not the components.
After all, that's what interfaces are for no? To encapsulate the details of who is implementing the interface so it really doesn't matter whether component A or component B is realizing the interface.

Geert