Messages

1

Suggestions and Requests / Re: I had it with the UI

« on: May 12, 2005, 04:19:01 am »

Evil, Is this more "down your street"?

For sure, some good common sense advice, thanks.

2

Suggestions and Requests / Re: I had it with the UI

« on: May 11, 2005, 02:32:54 am »

Try: Don't Make Me Think : A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability (2nd Edition) by Steve Krug

It's web oriented, but the lessons are general...

Paolo

A good book, but the main lesson is that web surfers have a short attention span and don't like to concentrate. You can try to use a UML tool without concentrating if you like, but not on my project.

3

General Board / Re: Collaboration from multiple sites - best pract

« on: May 12, 2005, 05:19:20 am »

Why?  

Mr Cantoni may have his own motives for his one man crusade to criticize EA at every opportunity, but to record his criticisms in a shared repository for all to enjoy... Astonishing conceit!

4

General Board / Re: Collaboration from multiple sites - best pract

« on: May 12, 2005, 04:14:13 am »

One of the models we discussed is something I've developed which keeps track of anomalies and defects in EA.

I have a diagram that has a list of classes representing different parts of EA and when you select the class with the Maintenance window open you get the list of issues, defects etc associated with that thing...  That way, new (especially evaluating) users can quickly check if it's a known problem or something else.

Words fail me.

5

General Board / Re: EA 5.0 beta : must uninstall v4.51 first

« on: May 12, 2005, 04:01:13 am »

Probably wrong assumption?  TIP: When you speak or write the word "assume" - find a way to turn it into a non-assumption...

It's perfectly valid to give an answer based on stated assumptions. Do you ever use pre-conditions in your modelling efforts?

For what it's worth, I think the EA installer is very good. Apart from pressing "I agree" on the licence agreement, it's clicking Next, next, next, next, next all down the line. No difficult questions, and the Next button is in the same place every time. It even seems to work if you re-install an old version over a new version.

6

General Board / Re: Reflexive Associations

« on: May 11, 2005, 02:36:19 am »

It was probably the quote button next to the reply button.

This is really very funny! I wonder how many of Paolo's perceived "inconsistencies" were actually finger trouble?

7

Uml Process / Re: Inheritability of stereotypes

« on: May 12, 2005, 03:48:58 am »

The actual term used in the UML 2 is "feature".

Of course, apologies, feature is indeed le mot juste. It was on the tip of my tongue, honest!

Your point is taken for strict UML 2.  My question is "beyond" current UML.  I guess I'm proposing that stereotypes (and any associated characteristics like adornment and tagged values) be treated as "features"

I hope they never are. If stereotypes aren't inherited, you can choose to apply them wherever you wish; if they are inherited, you can no longer choose not to apply them.

8

Uml Process / Re: Inheritability of stereotypes

« on: May 11, 2005, 02:26:05 am »

Interesting point Evil...  I'll have to think about it.  My first impression, though, is that <<root>> might not be an appropriate use of stereotype.  I would have thought the stereotype needs to indicate something innate in the class, which, I suspect, in this instance it doesn't.
Can you explain the semantics of <<root>>.

Oh I dunno, it was just the first example that came to mind. Perhaps you could be generating a custom language and the syntax of root nodes is different to other nodes - the stereotype is used to modify the code generation templates. I think that's a perfectly valid use for stereotypes. You could also do it with a tagged value, but applying tagged values to elements is another valid use for stereotypes. Either way, stereotypes aren't "properties", so they aren't inherited.

9

Uml Process / Re: Inheritability of stereotypes

« on: May 10, 2005, 02:43:05 am »

The UML 2.0 specification appears to be silent on the matter,
but why aren't stereotypes inherited along with attributes and
operations?  

Here's an example: suppose you have a class hierarchy and you want to mark the root node with the <<root>> stereotype. Do you really want stereotypes to be inherited?