Messages

16

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Bug Submission feature requests

« on: March 03, 2006, 05:07:41 am »

I'll add my vote. Being able to look for a report or request before asking for help would untangle a lot of our discussions elsewhere.

It would also help to find out what was in the pipe. If we could also add our support to pending requests it would probably help Sparx to prioritize.

17

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Consistent Diagram Item rendering proposal

« on: May 05, 2010, 06:49:51 am »

I definitely vote for this!

Thanks for taking the time Paolo. This is well thought out and presented. [No surprise there of course.]

I have submitted a feature request with the same name, citing both pages of the above posting. At this point I have the automated receipt message. I do not yet have a request number or a response.

David

18

Suggestions and Requests / Re: drawnativeshape() - extension

« on: September 15, 2009, 08:33:19 pm »

Absolutely!

I cannot count the number of times this could have saved some real pain. For me, some of these instances resulted in abandoning the goal of using a custom shape.

19

Suggestions and Requests / Re: "NOT allowed" relationships in QuickLinker

« on: May 11, 2010, 07:17:29 am »

AFAIK that is correct Oliver. It's been some time since I set up a QL profile but that seems familiar.

I think one of Paolo's points - the one I was commenting on - was that this is fine as far as it goes, but not really enough. Instead of (just) disallowing the link the QL should give the user some kind of feedback that such a link is not allowed.

At the bare minimum that a <link type> is inappropriate or invalid here. And <link type> should allow or include <link stereotype> if defined in a profile. It would be better if the QL profile provided a default message and a way that the profile designer could override this with a custom message for this circumstance. Better still would be the ability to specify that <link type> or <link stereotype> or perhaps some other attribute would appear at a certain point by attribute name rather than hard-wiring a value into the message.

Do I have this right (as far as I am taking it) Paolo?

David

20

Suggestions and Requests / Re: "NOT allowed" relationships in QuickLinker

« on: May 10, 2010, 08:59:36 pm »

Yes Paolo!

Regardless of the results when you check this out...

Your second point hearkens back to basics. If you do not document your work (such that the end user can understand what is actually happening) then you have not done your work correctly. If you cannot document your work then you cannot do your work correctly. If the Quick Linker prevents you from (simultaneously) doing the job right (preventing an improper link) and telling the user what is happening (that the link is improper) then something is just plain wrong.

David

21

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Adding auto name counter to requirement elemen

« on: September 25, 2008, 01:07:25 am »

Click the Feature Request link below the Support link near the bottom of any forum page. That's the form you need to fill out. Those go directly into the hopper for consideration by Sparx.

22

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Adding auto name counter to requirement elemen

« on: September 24, 2008, 09:12:35 pm »

Marcel,

My suggestion is that you go ahead and make the request. Simon C has added the prefix request, but not necessarily the rest. Given that whoever is doing the details might be looking for ideas related to the prefix (only), the link to the forum might not serve your original purpose. [That's not to suggest that the Sparxians wouldn't be receptive, just that the context at the time might be too narrow.]

So, make the 'full' request, and also cite this thread. The Sparxians are active in the forum, and will certainly read the posts, if not participate directly. You just want to cue them to look beyond the prefix concept.

David

23

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Adding auto name counter to requirement elemen

« on: September 24, 2008, 07:58:04 am »

Just for the record, AFAIK auto-naming is already implemented for elements created from the toolbox.

24

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Adding auto name counter to requirement elemen

« on: September 24, 2008, 01:08:42 am »

I mean that the Activate button would become a set of options. These would cover the different 'modes' (for lack of another term) that auto-naming might be used for.

Modes would include the current facility (i.e. the Activate button would become one option), the capability to auto-name requirements that are 'pulled' from elements, the ability to back fill deleted names (suggested in another thread), activating auto-naming for profiles (that have defined names), stereotype auto-naming (which might constitute a group with the profile option), and whatever.

The Activate button would transform itself in another way. There would be a 'master' option to turn auto-naming on or off across the board. This is sort of what Activate does now, since auto-naming only has one mode.

David

25

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Adding auto name counter to requirement elemen

« on: September 23, 2008, 09:20:24 pm »

Well done Marcel,

I agree with the underlying concept here.

In particular, extending the auto-naming feature to things like profiles would be a valuable extension to EA.

I would like to see such things as additional options for auto-naming in general. That is, they could be disabled - something like a check box on the auto-naming dialog, or even in a new Tools | Options dialog page - by the user. I envisage several options here, perhaps operating independently, but I have not worked out what the individual options are. They could be things like your requirements idea, or application to profiles (in general, with the individual profiles determining the structure and if auto-naming would apply at all).

David

26

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Viewing more things 'side by side'

« on: September 25, 2009, 10:45:43 am »

Absolutely. [To both the original idea and the multiple monitor support.]

27

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Allow replacement of EA Aggregations

« on: October 30, 2006, 05:44:30 am »

I believe you are correct on this.

That said, I also agree this should be an option setting. While I'd personally like the default to be as you've proposed, it is probably best to have it default to current behavior, since this might prevent breaking current models.

Add my vote.

28

Suggestions and Requests / Re: SSKeyStore tool

« on: July 29, 2008, 09:52:34 am »

Please let me know - you can use the PM function of the forum - when this is available.

Thanks much,
David

29

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Open recently opend diagrams of a project

« on: February 27, 2009, 10:39:40 am »

Gee I Did Not Know That?

30

Suggestions and Requests / Re: Open recently opend diagrams of a project

« on: February 27, 2009, 12:52:34 am »

Look up Save Project As | Shortcut... in the EA help index. I think you have more options when using a DBMS repository than an EAP file (but that limitation might have been removed).