Messages

1

General Board / Re: Solution for Exporting Models to RSA from EA

« on: October 17, 2007, 06:46:23 am »

As a follow-up, an article on the IBM Rational support site identifies the issue as something specific to a non-standard XML that appears in the EA-produced XMI file:

PK39291: Cannot import XMI file from Sparx Enterprise Architect (
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=2044&context=SSCM72&context=SSRTLW&context=SSJM4G&context=SSCGQ7C&dc=DB520&dc=D600&dc=DB530&dc=D430&dc=D410&dc=D700&dc=DB500&dc=DB560&dc=DB540&dc=D420&dc=D400&dc=DB510&dc=DB550&q1=XMI+import&uid=swg1PK39291&loc=en_US&cs=utf-8&lang=en )

2

General Board / Solution for Exporting Models to RSA from EA

« on: October 17, 2007, 06:36:55 am »

I have read a few posts from earlier in 2007 on a known limitation/issue of not being able to import EA-exported models into RSA (EA XMI export needs to support eclipse-based standard).

Is there any information that Sparx is working on this and if so, when we might see it in a build?

3

General Board / Re: Constraint does not auto update

« on: August 29, 2006, 01:54:41 pm »

In sequence diagrams there I use inserted scenarios (as related notes) (ICONIX-like) and when I change use case scenario, it changes here.

I apologize for detracting from your original topic/post...

Curiously, I've been wanting to know how "inserted scenarios (as related notes)" can be done.

A quick scan of the help doesn't describe how to reveal the text from the scenario in a use case on the sequence diagram....likely something obvious I am missing?

Thanks.

4

General Board / Re: Documentation of full modell

« on: August 04, 2006, 01:57:12 pm »

is there a way to crate the documentation for the whole modell in one step?
I currently know only how to create Project Root1 documentation allone and the Project Root1 documentation.

Thx
Peter

You can create a class diagram (in either root, or in a new root called "Project Documentation", add a simple view to that and then create a class diagram.

Add a new class to the diagram and make it a "model document stereotype".

You can now drag the individual packages (A,B,C,D..etc) from both roots and drop them in this container class.

Once that is done, you can click on the model document class and run the document generator which will operate on all four packages at once.

5

General Board / Re: Use Cases

« on: August 04, 2006, 02:08:22 pm »

Are we putting too much information in the Business process model? What model structure do other people use to support the initial analysis with business users?

Maybe too detailed or maybe not...it is hard to say.


A general rule I apply when business modeling is to ensure that the model is agnostic of systems...meaning I do not attempt to show what aspect of the business process is completed by the system (e.g., no swimlanes for systems or system components).

This usually allows the business model to be a better description of what has to happen at a high level of abstraction and avoids insignificant tasks that are a symptom of how something is implemented today.


My use cases then go deeper and refine this by modeling specific user-system interaction..here I am interested in learning what tasks the system will be responsible for.

Cheers,

6

General Board / "Issues" Objects Don't Show Up?

« on: July 24, 2006, 02:08:52 pm »

I've been experimenting with EA's "issue" objects as a means of quickly annotating a follow-up item/issue on a diagram (e.g., activity diagram).

I created an issue on the diagram using the drag-connector (under common, issue) which creates the issue object, launches the dialogue where I can type a name, alias, and notes, then connects it to a diagram object via a simple trace.

The "issues" created on the diagrams do not seem to appear anywhere I would expect it to (neither in the model issues dialogue or on the project issues reporting mechanism).  

They do show up on the relationship matrix which is not necessarily ideal for working through and managing issues across the model.

Any suggestions or am I misunderstanding the purpose of the "issue" object?

7

General Board / Re: Creating Signals in Sequence Diagrams as metho

« on: July 19, 2006, 11:38:23 am »

If there is a method in the class you can create methods and use them as messages. This avoids you the double effort in creating methods for the classes you design. So I guess this can be regarded as a bug and I would appreciate if you resolve this in the next version.

Hi Lars,

I had the same observation/question. EA does not automatically create methods for messages you assign.  You must create the method first, then select it from the drop down.

Some other UML modeling tools would append methods as you go through your design.

I think this may be intentional in EA (not a bug) in order to support logical/analysis level sequence diagramming where an analyst wants to illustrate a message without necessarily creating a method.

8

Bugs and Issues / Re: Bug: Directional Indicators on Assoc. Label

« on: August 15, 2014, 08:30:48 am »

The direction indicator is stored against the original diagram.

Thanks Simon.

Has it always been this way? I believe earlier version of EA 8.x/9.x might have treated this differently.

 Although it makes sense to control visibility of the directional indicator, I think the direction should be a stored attribute of the label (present wherever it is visible).

Since the verb phrase or direction implied by an association should not be altered like other cosmetic features, I don't think shouldn't be a diagram-specific characteristic.  To do so means that the direction is diagram specific....but really it shouldn't be in the majority of modeling scenarios.


I am going to submit this as a change/enhancement request

9

Bugs and Issues / Bug: Directional Indicators on Assoc. Label

« on: August 01, 2014, 04:05:51 am »

EA version: 10.0.1009

Context: UML Class Diagramming

Situation:  When a directional indicator is placed on an association's label to aid in reading the model (not to be confused with the direction of the association itself), the directional arrow fails to appear when the elements are placed on another class diagram.

Example:
I model two classes "Customer" and "Order" .
I create an association from customer to order which I name "Places".
I right click the label "Places" and place a direction "to destination".
I then create a new class diagram and add both classes to it.
The association and its label appear, however, the directional indicator is missing from the new diagram.

Is this a bug or an option/feature that needs to be set correctly?

10

Bugs and Issues / Re: Component Instances & Interaction

« on: October 29, 2013, 06:58:06 am »

I also stumbled upon this. If you create a lifeline inside the interaction and classify that with the component, this works. However, you should report that as a bug using the link bottom right of this page.

q.

Thanks. I've reported the issue as a bug.  The workaround you described works well for standard UML models (does not work with some MDGs like Archimate 2).

11

Bugs and Issues / Component Instances & Interaction

« on: October 26, 2013, 10:18:26 am »

Situation: When doing use case realization, a common modeling pattern is to add an interaction with sequence diagram to the element.

The interaction creates a containing structure for the sequence diagram and the instances/content of the diagram.

Everything works well except that if I want to do a high-level realization by instantiating components and showing their participation in the interaction, the interaction refuses to contain the component instance.

A dialogue appears when I try and place the instance within the interaction: "The requested move is not supported".

This restriction does not appear when I use an activity container (Activity with Activity Diagram) within the use case realization.  It happily accepts component instances.

12

Uml Process / Organizing RUP Use Case Realization in EA

« on: February 07, 2007, 12:53:38 pm »

Our team is new to EA and we are looking for any thoughts or experiences on how you may have organized RUP Use Case Realizations (within your EA model).

We will likely develop several realizations where needed for each use case in our model (view of participating classes, sequence diagrams...etc.).  

There seems to be two approaches:

1) Within EA, we can organize these as diagrams within (under neath) each use case in our analysis

or

2) we can place them in a seperate package and use naming conventions combined with some form of trace to tie it back to the functional use case.


Considering that we'd like to be in a good position to easily publish the use case model along with realizations, I am leaning towards option 1 (within the use case). However, if we end up doing a significant number of realizations for a single use case, this could get messy.

Does anyone have advice on either approach (or a suggestion for an approach we haven't considered)?

13

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Archimate MDG: Instance Classifier Problem

« on: October 26, 2013, 10:22:47 am »

When an Archimate element is used as an instance (e.g., a lifeline in a sequence diagram), the instance classifier is not shown on the diagram.

The instance classifier is known (shows in the tool tip when you hover over the instance for example).

Bug or expected behaviour of the Archimate MDG?

14

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Shape Scripting on Top of an MDG?

« on: September 11, 2013, 07:38:24 am »

Does anyone know if it is possible to add shape scripts on top of elements that are defined as part of an MDG?

Example: "I want to convey a tagged value within an Archimate Work Package"

I know how to do this with stereotypes that we control directly but I am unsure about MDG elements.

15

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: Availability of Archimate 2.0 MDG Source Model

« on: September 11, 2013, 07:31:00 am »

Just a quick update. Bug report was filed.

Rather than classify the root cause as an issues relating to the way the Archimate 2.0 MDG was constructed, Sparx support has decided that the best way to solve this problems to extend the traceability window, relationship matrix (etc...) to interpret meta-types/stereotypes.