Messages

196

Uml Process / Re: How to Model ETL (Extract Transform Load) mapp

« on: September 11, 2008, 04:31:12 am »

Hi,

The lowest level element that you can associate is the class. EA will not allow you to associate individual attributes.

An alternative is to model each attribute using a class and stereotype as Source_Attribute and Target_Attribute. You may then associate these using the matrix facility.

Please, kindly raise a feature request to Sparx. There is an OMG standard  UML Profile, the Common Warehouse Metadata (CWM) which Sparx may implement as an extension to the current data modelling facility.

Segun

197

Uml Process / Re: How to Model ETL (Extract Transform Load) mapp

« on: September 10, 2008, 03:57:54 am »

Hi ,

Create association classes between the source and target and name this class source_target_transform. Identify the input_attributes and output_attributes. The methods or operations are the transformation code.

Segun

198

Uml Process / Re: MoDAF

« on: February 19, 2008, 08:11:30 am »

This product is now available as the OMG UPDM Add-In which covers DoDAF and MoDAF.

Look up the latest announcements on beta Add-Ins.

199

Uml Process / Re: Message mapping

« on: February 19, 2008, 08:18:24 am »

I am not sure I understand your question.
You are have modelled the data elements in two messages as classes. You now need to map these classes.
Why dont you use the matrix functionality in the tool for this.
If you want to document the transformation business rules, you may have to write scripts.
I will advise you contact Sparxsystems support for help. They will provide useful guidance.

kind regards

Segun

200

Uml Process / Re: UML Profile for SOA

« on: September 27, 2007, 07:16:15 am »

Hi Elsie,

I requested for this feature from Sparxsystems to enable me use the IBM SOMA methodology with EA (combination of best-in-class method and toolset) about one year ago. sparxsystem was unable to develop the profile but encouraged me to try.

I created the profile with some difficulty with an earlier version of EA. My interests have since then changed so I have not improved on my initial efforts.

Please, advice me on how I may forward the files to you. I am sure that you can improve on what exists for the common good of the EA community.

kind regards

Segun

201

Uml Process / Re: XML schema key/keyref problem

« on: April 19, 2007, 07:33:05 am »

Nico,

The EA User Guide has a chapter on XML Schema stereotypes supported. If they are not in the manual, please raise a feature request.

salayande

202

Uml Process / Re-usable XML Component

« on: April 20, 2007, 10:05:56 am »

Dear all,

I am modeling to generate re-usable enterprise XML Schema components for the composition of application messages. Examples of these components include, Party.

When I create a normal class, for example, a FullName with attributes, FirstName and Surname, EA creates the schema:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">

<xs:element name="FullName" type="FullName"/>

<xs:complexType name="FullName">


<xs:sequence>



<xs:element name="FirstName" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>



<xs:element name="Surname" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>


</xs:sequence>

</xs:complexType>
</xs:schema>

I was advised by a developer that this fragment is not re-usable when imported into other message schema because, the elements FirstName and Surname are not declared as global XSDsimpleTypes.

I then recreated the model with the fullName as a class with stereotype XSDcomplexType and the two attributes as classes with stereotype XSDsimpleType. I was able to generate the kind of XSD considered by the developers to be re-usable below:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">

<xs:element name="FullName" type="FullName"/>

<xs:complexType name="FullName">


<xs:sequence>



<xs:element name="Surname" type="Surname" minOccurs="0"/>



<xs:element name="FirstName" type="FirstName" minOccurs="0"/>


</xs:sequence>

</xs:complexType>

<xs:simpleType name="FirstName">


<xs:restriction base="xs:string"/>

</xs:simpleType>

<xs:simpleType name="Surname">


<xs:restriction base="xs:string"/>

</xs:simpleType>
</xs:schema>

While this solution worked for very small models, the kind of classes in my model may have up to 30 data attributes, which make this approach difficult for large models.

A solution to my problem is to create the attributes as is normally done but set its stereotype to XSDsimpletype within the class. This should be equivalent to the last model but when I try to generate, I get the firts schema.

Does anyone know how to modify the EA transformer to achieve good result. I need a solution fast else my job is on the line given that I introduced EA to the company.

I appreciate any help. Thank you in anticipation.

salayande

203

Uml Process / TOGAF & ADM Add-In

« on: March 10, 2007, 01:05:35 pm »

Is anyone aware of a TOGAF Add-In that supports the ADM process. Any pointers will be appreciated.

204

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: new EA Add-In "Collaboration Addin"

« on: March 09, 2010, 06:05:43 am »

Problem with costs of bugs management is that it eats away at investments for innovation. Over the years, it has stiffled the growth of some other mono-product CASE tool vendors but we want Sparxsystem alive and innovating into the future.

205

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: new EA Add-In "Collaboration Addin"

« on: March 08, 2010, 06:44:40 am »

In the early days when I held the corporate licence, it was a great headache managing the many add-ins, versions, upgrades, issues and even licences. For example, I don't know what the future of the Zachman framework is. The current version does not support the current framework. Users want to invest in technologies (including Add-Ins) with a future. I believe this is one of Gartner's criteria for evaluating EA CASE tools.

Getting the Ultimate licence was an interim solution for me (I didn't have to manage multiple licences for each Add-In) and I think that the integration of some Add-Ins (which are not driven by specific communities of practice, example OMG UPDM) into the core EA should be considered by Sparxsystems.

Features like the Collaboration Add-In is what people pay the annual support fees for and not the removal of software bugs.

206

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: new EA Add-In "Collaboration Addin"

« on: March 07, 2010, 09:03:22 am »

  This should be a standard feature / capability in EA.

207

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: OWL, VOM and UML Profile

« on: February 25, 2010, 07:31:27 am »

Herbert and Don,

I share the same requirements as Herbert: Semantic Interoperability.
I use Protege to develop Ontologies and generate OWL. I would like to do all my work in a single modeling environment.

With some effort and help from Sparxsystems, it must be possible to implement an Add-In based on the OMG UML Profile labelled the Ontology Definition Metamodel (ODM). Specification may be found at http://www.omg.org/spec/ODM/1.0

208

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: OWL, VOM and UML Profile

« on: February 24, 2010, 05:47:19 am »

I have also submitted another feature request.
Generating OWL may not seem difficult but import - export built into the tooling  (as in XSD) will be.

209

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: VBScript Libraries

« on: February 23, 2010, 06:24:17 am »

Gentlemen,

Unfortunately, some users require EA for documenting requirements and architecture. It is so easy to fall into that frame of mind where you believe everyone has the same skill capability as yourself. I am begining to think that this probably an IT thing!

Sparxsystems should pursue an aggresive strategy of making EA easy and simple to use. If it is almost easier to knock up an application in MS Access than it is with using EA, somebody should explain to me where the productivity lies. The industry started using spreadsheets for Information Strategy Planning as espoused by the likes of James martin and Clive Finklestein (and a host of Consultancies that practice Enterprise Engineering) many years ago. Today, a consultancy which uses EA for UML modeling turned down the tool on my site because Excel was considered better than the Matrix Relationship tool.

The profiles of users of CASE tools like EA has changed so much to reflect the widespread diffusion and use of software productivity tools (includes CASE).

Given that most managers now create MS Access and Excel VBA applications with ease, the IT department loses credibility when it suggests that the new CASE tool (EA) that was purchased to create applications will take weeks longer. This might be a simplification but it suggests a technical direction for CASE functional and non-functional requirements moving into into the future.

A case in point is the transformation IDE in EA. Some of us who had the benefit of using metadata transformation tools in Data Warehouse environments are used to graphical environments that enable you to map source to target schema and visually assign your transforms based on a library. Compare this picture with what we currently have in EA and you will understand where I am coming from.

My apologies, gentlemen for this rant but sometimes when I come across comments from some of my colleagues, I visualise the scenario in the 1990s when some of us managed to undermine CASE tools and we failed to achieve the levels of productivity expected by the business. This later resulted in some high profile businesses rightsizing and outsourcing of some IT functions.

What it does suggest is we should do more user profiling, user scenario analysis, to understand the users of our tools and also some technology forecasting.

kind regards

Segun

210

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: ShapeScripts and UML Profile for TAM (from SAP

« on: February 21, 2010, 09:40:40 am »

Hi Danny,

I've been on the reference sites related to the TAM and I support the view that this profile is required in EA. Incidentally, I recently made a request for EA support for the SAP EPC Methodology.

The value of these Add-Ins and profiles is that they directly address the needs of people working on the shop floor. I use EA daily in an environment that has IBM System Architect (Telelogic) simply because Sparxsystems EA hosts a number of profiles that address next generation architecture modeling. I really wish I had the time but my day job leaves me little room to undertake this kind of effort.

I am aware that Sparxsystems may not guarantee a product if you placed a feature request but then again they have been known to provide delightful surprises and this might be one of them.

Please, kindly keep the community informed of progress on this effort.

best regards

Segun