Sparx Systems Forum

Enterprise Architect => Suggestions and Requests => Topic started by: Paolo F Cantoni on January 19, 2007, 05:27:22 am

Title: BUG: {abstract} inconsistency
Post by: Paolo F Cantoni on January 19, 2007, 05:27:22 am

In Compartmentalized Notation for a class, the {abstract} property (as per the [size=13]UML 2.1 Superstructure (interim)[/size] (http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/2006-04-02) Specification) causes the rendered name to be italicized.

Behavioural elements can also be marked {abstract}.  However, in non-Compartmentalized Notation the name is not italicized.  From a consistency point of view, it would seem appropriate to render the name italicised in both forms.  Extending the consistency, it would be preferable that the Browser also render {abstract} vertexes with italicized names.

Thoughts? Votes?
Paolo

Title: Re: BUG: {abstract} inconsistency
Post by: Jan ´Bary´ Glas on January 19, 2007, 05:43:58 am

We were discussing here italicizing {abstract} in Project Browser once and our conclusion was that it may be nice - but not so important for writing it here.
So, Paolo, you have my vote.

Title: Re: BUG: {abstract} inconsistency
Post by: «Midnight» on January 19, 2007, 05:52:19 am

Yes.

This would be particularly valuable where "{abstract}" did not appear in the listing. The browser is a prime example.

[EDIT: I suppose we could contemplate not using italics if the user chooses not to highlight abstract elements. Still, the option is scoped to a diagram and the browser is scoped to the model. Perhaps we could have a global setting, much as with stereotypes, for browser display.]