Use Case Overview diagram

[Glassboy]

I attempted to contact the authors of this book to find out more, but I didn't receive a reply to my question.

Learning UML 2.0 lists a Use Case Overview diagram as a type of UML diagram, but I can't find a mention of it anywhere else.

https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/learning-uml-20/0596009828/ch02s03.html#learnuml2-CHP-2-FIG-16

Can any of our UML luminaries cast any light on this diagram type?

[Geert Bellekens]

I just checked, and there's no such thing in UML 2.5 (I'm pretty sure it hasn't changed from 2.0).

There is a Use Case Diagram, and an Interaction Overview Diagram.

Maybe they meant the latter?

Geert

[philchudley]

Just looked at the example and in my opinion this is not UML.

When I want to create such an overview I use the UML concept of a Composite Element, therefore in the example you provided, use a Composite Use Case to represent the groups of functionality (represented by rectangles in the example).

Then you can use the fact that these top level Use Cases are composites to "drill down" to more specific Use Case Models.

This is Modelling using Abstraction.

If you really do want your diagram to look like the example given, then simply use Rectangle Notation for your top level Use Cases.

Phil

[qwerty]

The rectangles do not denote use cases but actors (though the one doesn't even show the stereotype correctly). The UCs seem to be the connectors- Definitely this is not UML and there has never been something like a UCOD, just an Interaction Overview Diagram which looks completely different. Reading the words from that book I would throw it into the bin. Using some own notation is ok, but pretending t is a standard isn't.

q.

[Glassboy]

Thanks all, you're pretty much confirming the opinion I'd formed.

I was interested in the diagram type as I constantly come across the need for a type of system context diagram that's not currently well supported anywhere.

My challenge at the moment is modelling the flow of data elements between systems, and tagging significant things that relate to it.  I suspect I'll eventually end up will end up with a UML franken-diagram.

[qwerty]

This is perfectly ok. The specs give quite some freedom in creating diagrams at wish. But if you do so: be consistent and have some kind of notation description (a legend at least).

q.