Sparx Systems Forum
Enterprise Architect => General Board => Topic started by: stefano.savarino on November 28, 2016, 09:06:20 pm
-
Hello!
I'm pretty new to EA, so maybe this question is trivial, but please, bear with me ;)
I've created a diagram where there are blocks connected by simple connectors.
Now I would like to write some properties for these connectors, but I would like them to be searchable.
I've tried with tags and constraints, but none of them pops up if I try to run a search on their names (Ctrl+F, Find in Project, Extended).
How could I do something like this?
Thank you,
/Stefano
-
A search can only show elements. You could at best find the source elements for the connectors in question. What are you trying? Maybe a diagram filter could be something you want to look at?
q.
-
Thanks for your answer.
I thought that the connector was an element and therefore it could be showed.
If that's not the case, then I have to rethink my approach a bit :)
/Stefano
-
Connectors are 2nd class citizens in EA and very unlikely to get an upgrade :-(
q.
-
Hi Stefano,
Elements are not connectors. The three key fundamentals in the EA data model are element, connector and diagram.
A connector connects two elements, but it is not itself an element.
If you want to create a search definition that will return only connectors, you can -- but only by writing your own SQL search. The search builder's filters can be applied to a number of things (elements, diagrams, attributes, ...), but not to connectors. But if you define an SQL search instead, you can retrieve just connectors.
Connectors have names (though often they're empty), and stereotypes, and can have tagged values and various other properties as well.
Note, however, that while such a search would return a tabulated list of connectors which you could copy into a spreadsheet, you would not be able to right-click an entry and select "Find in Diagrams" or "Find in Project Browser", since these functions apply only to elements, not to connectors.
So it's a question of what you're searching for, and what you want to do with the results. If you're really looking for elements which are connected to other elements in a certain way, and/or you want to navigate from the search results into the model, then an element search is what you want.
An SQL search can be made arbitrarily complex. You could for instance write one which finds all elements which have a connector of a certain type which in turn has a certain tagged value.
HTH,
/Uffe
-
If you want to create a search definition that will return only connectors, you can -- but only by writing your own SQL search. The search builder's filters can be applied to a number of things (elements, diagrams, attributes, ...), but not to connectors. But if you define an SQL search instead, you can retrieve just connectors.
This SQL result will be pointless, though. You can not navigate from the SQL results unless you include either source or target (which are elements) and make them the primary result of the search.
q.
-
If you want to create a search definition that will return only connectors, you can -- but only by writing your own SQL search. The search builder's filters can be applied to a number of things (elements, diagrams, attributes, ...), but not to connectors. But if you define an SQL search instead, you can retrieve just connectors.
This SQL result will be pointless, though. You can not navigate from the SQL results unless you include either source or target (which are elements) and make them the primary result of the search.
And hence
Note, however, that while such a search would return a tabulated list of connectors which you could copy into a spreadsheet, you would not be able to right-click an entry and select "Find in Diagrams" or "Find in Project Browser", since these functions apply only to elements, not to connectors.
So a connector search won't allow you to navigate to the results in the model, but if there's information stored in the connectors themselves you can retrieve it. Whether there's a point to that depends on the situation. The OP only stated that he wanted searchable properties, he didn't specify what he wanted to do with the results.
/U
-
Hence my first question on top...
q.
-
This is from a long time ago I know.
But I'd like to reflect on the fact the there is a use case for being able to search connectors.
Connectors may be called 'second class citizens', but the manifest very much like entries with properties including name, alias, notes, etc.
Therefore it makes send to be able to "find" them
-
This is from a long time ago I know.
But I'd like to reflect on the fact the there is a use case for being able to search connectors.
Connectors may be called 'second class citizens', but the manifest very much like entries with properties including name, alias, notes, etc.
Therefore it makes send to be able to "find" them
Wot 'e sed!
Paolo
-
The ability to find connectors needs some new feature in EA - there are many ways to specify connectors of interest. My use case here usually is triggered be one class and inspecting it. I never look for connector "Charlie" since almost all connctors anonymous. Looking for connectors with specific multiplicities per se seems also pointless. So what exactly IS your use case?
q.
-
For example I have a number of connectors named "SSL" and I want to update them to "TLS"
-
For example, I have a number of connectors named "SSL", and I want to update them to "TLS".
Wot 'e sed!
It is an apparent paradox that while the VAST proportion of arcs are unnamed, the named ones (by Shannon's law of Information Transfer) will convey much more meaning and must be managed more tightly! For example, we include relationship names on the metamodel arcs, which are very important.
Paolo
-
For example I have a number of connectors named "SSL" and I want to update them to "TLS"
[This won't directly answer your question (sorry!)]
If we have established that you can't *easily* search by Connector 'Name', I guess that information is kind of redundant except to graphically label Connectors on a SysML diagram - in your case to show that a Connector represents a TSL/SSL connection.
So I would say it would be much more useful to add *searchable* (and therefore more meaningful) information to the model. So for example, add DataItems or InformationFlows to your Connectors that not only describe 'textually' but also *model* the connections that you are representing on the diagram. And ideally model the interfaces at each end too...
It's easier to do this when working from scratch of course, and depending on the size of your model may well be undesirable to spend this effort after the fact. But that's my recommendation in the absence of searchable Connectors and in the interest of creating a more useful model.
I would also like to have the ability to search by Connector Name, or at the very least to have the Connector Name represented in the 'List View' and in the 'Relationships' tab when selecting a Port.
*Lots of asterisks were used in the creation of this post*
-
For example I have a number of connectors named "SSL" and I want to update them to "TLS"
[This won't directly answer your question (sorry!)]
If we have established that you can't *easily* search by Connector 'Name'.
I'd suggest that SparxSystems could *easily* add a search fo connector (arc) attributes to the tool.
After all its a database and everything is retrievable.
Furthermore it would be *easy* to then have a context menu for the results of the search that provided options to open the properties for that connector, or listed the diagrams the connector is (displayed) in.
-
Yep, I don't disagree! I think Connectors do have GUIDs somewhere under the hood, and as you said they are characterised in t_connector. And they can be loosely implied from a combination of properties like Source, Target and Type (as suggested by qwerty).
But yes it would be much more user-friendly to have Sparx do it for us with native functionality.