Messages

1

General Board / Re: Multi-language model

« on: November 09, 2018, 01:44:46 pm »

jaimeglz wins "best post award".

Thanks for making me laugh!

Hi all,

Last year we had a customer with HQ in Witchita, Kansas, and a local subsidiary in Tlaxcalancingo, Puebla, who wanted everything in English and Español. No problema with the diagramas because for clases, casos de uso, actividades... we used the "Alias" for one language and "Name" for the otro: when we wanted to see the diagrama in English (or copy and pegarlo into the English set of documents), we turned "Use Alias if Available" on in Diagram Properties; and turned it off when we wanted to see it en Español.

The solution (¡caramba!) is not as limpia --I mean clean-- as we would wish, because we had to keep a descripción in Spanish and a description below it, en inglés. This applied to the "Note", Constraint, Requisitos... sections. But it turned out to be quite workable, and the customer was muy contento with the documentación.

Saludos,

Jaime

2

General Board / Re: Customer Journeys in EA

« on: November 09, 2018, 01:36:28 pm »

Use case diagrams are a very robust way to model customer needs, wants and expectations  (business capabilities).
The sequence diagrams let you model the specifics of how to satisfy these wants, needs and expectations.  You can accurately model how the system supports very complex requirements with sequence diagrams.
Then your class diagram shows the sum total of all classes and constraints that are needed to enable the sequence diagrams
Your system (technical) architecture (applications and interfaces) shows what IT systems provide the information defined in the class diagram.  In a good architecture (low cost, easy to implement and flexible to evolve) you will make careful balance of which system provides / enables  / transmits which class.

Each of these diagrams can be at contextual, logical or physical level depending what you want to show your audience.

Voila!  Traceability from customer requirement to IT enabler and back.  Time for a beer.

3

General Board / Re: Logical Data Modelling in SPARX

« on: October 22, 2018, 05:21:57 pm »

Here's quick and dirty from my own notes.  Sorry no image attach b/c I's not really incluied to find out how to use imgr or whatever.  Text based!

MDG: select core extensions, data modeling

Diagram / Features menu:
- Show Qualifiers and visibility indicators
- Elements: show attributes, operations (it want to list FKs in separate box)
- Features: show stereotypes, full attribute and parameter detail (shows PK and FK indicator
- Connectors: show relationships. Notation = IE

Create a data model Package (must have data modeling MDG enabled): right click on a view package (not model or root package) / Add a package / Select and apply model pattern / Select Database type
- The correct stereotype packages and diagrams are created and data modeling tools appear in the toolbox

Draw tables and columns, diagram shows PK/FK/datatype by default (can be hidden by double click on diagram / properties for conceptual and logical level; also select IE notation if you like Crow's Foot). 

Make sure that all tables having relationships have at least 1 PK, then draw association (the relationship), if 'edit association on creation' option is not enabled then double click on relationship, the FK editor opens, select cardinality including 1 or 0 (non-identifying).  FKs are automatically migrated to child entities (including composite keys)

There's much more including data dictionary, forward/reverse engineering etc.  Search data modeling in Sparx documentation. 

Goodspeed!

 

4

General Board / Re: Browse for diagram cannot select class, component and other diagrams!

« on: October 21, 2018, 01:53:27 pm »

Thanks that works much better and makes the buggy diagram browse thingy redundant.  Problem solved, thanks very much!

Makes things clearer. Yes, I have that same behavior. In V14 the option "Browse" appears even greyed out. I never have used that. So I'd bet it's just broken. Or it's one of those Sparxian universe functions that don't made it into my world. If nobody else jumps in: report a bug.

As sort of an alternative you can write your own search that spits out diagrams you want to see. Like

Code: [Select]

SELECT d.ea_guid As CLASSGUID, d.diagram_type As CLASSTYPE, d.Name
FROM t_diagram as d WHERE d.diagram_type like "Activity"

q.

5

General Board / Re: Logical Data Modelling in SPARX

« on: October 21, 2018, 01:28:46 pm »

I don't know how to upload an image in this forum, tried and failed using the 'image' button

If someone teaches me how to upload images I'll upload some examples

6

General Board / Re: Logical Data Modelling in SPARX

« on: October 21, 2018, 01:10:10 am »

Just a few 2c

A logical data model is implementation-independent (as-in: RDBMS independent) by definition.  If there is a RDBMS-specific item, then it's a physical data model.  The idea of logical data model is high reusability and easy extension to whatever technology is chosen for implementation (+robust against mid-project IT architecture changes)

A UML class diagram is a superset of data model (i.e. a data model + other stuff that you can simply ignore if you want to do ERD).  Any leading data modeling tool like ERWin or Sparx (professional and higher if I remember right) lets you choose what notation to use (IE/Crow's Foot or UML).  Yes UML handles PK/FK and FK migration just fine as stereotyped attributes.  You can also show triggers and indexes a stereotyped operations.  You can easily handle relationships with composite foreign keys (if that's what you mean by relationships between multiple attributes).

You can make conceptual, logical and physical data models easily in Crow's Foot.  Just click the notation you like by clicking on the Diagram options in Sparx.   There really is no significant difference in what you can do with UML or Crow's Foot / IE notation (google for details).

You can reverse/forward engineer from most leading DBMS with Sparx.  It's not as easy and fully featured as ERWin , Embarcadero etc; also relationship management is a little clunky, but anyway Sparx gets the job done at lower cost than dedicated data modeling tools.

There is a documentation PDF in the Sparx reference section that explains how to do all above.

Good luck!!

7

General Board / Re: Browse for diagram cannot select class, component and other diagrams!

« on: October 21, 2018, 12:55:02 am »

Mr QWERTY Sir, on my machine Start - Search - Browse for diagram, a "Select a diagram" window opens, Visible Diagram Types: there's a drop down box With only options being <All>, InteractionOverview, Sequence, Communication and Timing.  So for example I cannot filter only a Class or Use Case Diagram -  they don't appear in the drop down box.  Any suggestions welcome because I have a bajillion diagrams and I need to search them quickly.  Thanks!

8

General Board / Re: Browse for diagram cannot select class, component and other diagrams!

« on: October 19, 2018, 03:17:12 pm »

Still struggling with this...

Anyone has a fix?  Thanks

9

General Board / Browse for diagram cannot select class, component and other diagrams!

« on: October 04, 2018, 01:15:13 pm »

Hello version 13.0.1310 on WIndows 10, I have a custom MGD loaded but I don't think it makes any difference.  Start/Search/Browse for diagram, View Diagram Types the drop down menu only llows me to filter interaction overview, sequence, communication and timing diagrams!  I have plenty of class, package, component diagrams etc. and they show in the broswe diagram window bus they canno be filtered via the drop down menu.  Is this a bug or am I doing something wrong?   Thanks!

10

General Board / Re: Need help for correct ball and socket representation in component diagram

« on: September 12, 2018, 09:44:33 pm »

Hello - quoting myself below: the more immediate question is, does Sparx EA deviate from the UML 2.5 standard for interfaces?  Or did I miss something

Anyone knows?  Simon M?  Thanks!

Hello I have version 13.10 and I have a question about interface representation in component diagrams.  I think the correct UML 2.5 procedure (for example this works in Eclipse Papyrus UML modeler) is
- Draw component 1 and component 2
- Draw interface 1 and interface 2, right click - use circle notation
- Add <<Realize>> dependency from component 1 to interface 1
- Add <<Use>> dependency from component 2 to interface 2.  Interface 2 should be displayed as a socket (open semicircle), showing it's a required interface
- Add dependency between interface 2 and interface 1.  Done

However, well there is no <<Use>> dependency in the toolbox (you can find it in the dependency properties menu under Stereotypes) and the ball does not turn into a socket when connected via a <<use>> dependency. 

Is Sparx inconsistent with UML standard?  Or am I doing something wrong.

p.s. I know about the Exposed interface - right click and choose provided or required and the assembly connector, but these seem like a bit of a kludge (convenient at times, but still not a UML 2.5 compliant interface).  For example I can add attributes to the Expose interface; I can't differentiate between provided and required interfaces in assembly connector, and other issues.

Couldn't find anything useful in the documentation.  If anyone has ideas please share thanks!

11

General Board / Re: Requirements to ERD Entities, Attributes and Relationships

« on: September 11, 2018, 11:50:45 am »

Double click on class diagram - connectors - connector notation - select Information Engineering you get a very decent crow's feet notation.

For good Crow's Feet you can also look at DB Designer Fork (sourceforge.net) or MySQL Workbench (Oracle.com).  Both open source and both very capable.  Why would anyone want to use Oracle Data Modeler out of their own free will is beyond me.

diagram properties | Connector | Connector Notation

I don't see this option in "Diagram Properties."  I am using R14.
My data modeler refuses to use Sparx due to the way relationships are represented. He wants crows feet. He downloaded Oracle data modeler and is happy.
Doesn't make me feel good about the $2K we spent on Sparx licenses.

12

General Board / Re: Show several instances of the same element on one diagram

« on: September 05, 2018, 05:51:56 pm »

Mixing Archimate and UML IN THE SAME MODEL is not a good idea IMHO.  Each has its place, but their metamodels don't play nice together, so.... good luck???

Richard - for me the challenge is that we are using Archimate as well as UML.
From an Archimate perspective, there is no such thing as an instance (or alternatively an element is the instance depending on how you look at it).  The overhead and implications of creating children and generalisations make that quite messy, and breaks the model (in the sense that there are multiple things representing the same thing).

To be clear, I am sympathetic to the argument that whilst putting multiple elements on a diagram to handle layout challenges would be convenient, it's also a bit of a cop-out. However we have use cases where we genuinely need to represent the same element multiple times on Archimate diagrams due to the inherent structure of the type of diagram.  One example is 'box in box' diagrams of a hierarchy, with overlays of a different concept.  For example - a Capability Map (box in box) with an overlay of applications, projects, strategies etc  Usually the overlaid concept has elements associated with multiple capabilities, so needs to appear multiple times; the entire point of the diagram is to see where everything falls, how many for each capability, where there is overlap and duplication etc.

13

Bugs and Issues / Re: V1426; Why is it not possible anymore to have elements outside of a diagram fram

« on: September 05, 2018, 05:48:52 pm »

Yes that's my understanding.
Also to note "The elements of UML 2 style", point 42, Avoid diagram frames.  If you can, not having a frame at all is often a good idea. Although the UML standard seems to be driving in opposite direction (OK UML is not perfect, but still very good!)

14

General Board / Need help for correct ball and socket representation in component diagram

« on: September 05, 2018, 02:00:35 pm »

Hello I have version 13.10 and I have a question about interface representation in component diagrams.  I think the correct UML 2.5 procedure (for example this works in Eclipse Papyrus UML modeler) is
- Draw component 1 and component 2
- Draw interface 1 and interface 2, right click - use circle notation
- Add <<Realize>> dependency from component 1 to interface 1
- Add <<Use>> dependency from component 2 to interface 2.  Interface 2 should be displayed as a socket (open semicircle), showing it's a required interface
- Add dependency between interface 2 and interface 1.  Done

However, well there is no <<Use>> dependency in the toolbox (you can find it in the dependency properties menu under Stereotypes) and the ball does not turn into a socket when connected via a <<use>> dependency. 

Is Sparx inconsistent with UML standard?  Or am I doing something wrong.

p.s. I know about the Exposed interface - right click and choose provided or required and the assembly connector, but these seem like a bit of a kludge (convenient at times, but still not a UML 2.5 compliant interface).  For example I can add attributes to the Expose interface; I can't differentiate between provided and required interfaces in assembly connector, and other issues.

Couldn't find anything useful in the documentation.  If anyone has ideas please share thanks!

15

Bugs and Issues / Re: V1426; Why is it not possible anymore to have elements outside of a diagram fram

« on: September 05, 2018, 12:30:18 pm »

I don't think that's how diagram frames work in UML 2.5....  boundaries maybe, but not frames