Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - qwerty

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13
136
Bugs and Issues / MDG Toolbox elements
« on: March 16, 2012, 11:56:07 pm »
I have a further issue when trying to add UML::EntryState and UML::ExitState to the toolbox. EA won't recognize them and shows a guillemet at their location. The help states
Quote
EntryState (Entry)
Enumeration
ExceptionHandler (Exception)
ExecutionEnvironment (Execution Environment)
ExitState (Exit)
I also tried Entry and Exit but with no luck. Another bug and no geert-around? That's qwerty, so to say. I should have taken bugger as synonym.

q.

137
Bugs and Issues / MDG creation
« on: March 16, 2012, 10:07:39 pm »
 Why is it that MDG cooking feels like black magic? You save a couple of profile data to (often) the wrong place and EA stitch these together to a MDG. (Sparx has already seen that this is suboptimal and accepted to work on an improvement.) Then when I load the changed MDG there are just two possibilities. A) it works. B) it has flaws like stereotypes not appearing or toolboxes not being bound to diagrams. One remedy is to carefully re-save all profile data (let`s hope for a soon improvement of this process). But if that was not the cause your are lost. EA simply swallows all diagnostic information while I guess it's available somewhere inside the guts of EA.

The same goes for loading add-ins.

q.

P.S. The reason for writing this post was that a toolbox was not bound to a diagram. Now it looks like that the name is the reason. I called it Requirements and it did not work. After calling it Requirement (without s) it worked. Similarly for Activity. Maybe I did not read the FM carefully. However, why this constraint? My toolbox is inside my MDG. I should be allowed to call it at will.

(Another case for a "solution" 5 minutes after posting. But this time I don't delete the post.)


P.P.S:
Quote
toolbox: string = ToolboxName (where ToolboxName is the name of the toolbox profile for the toolbox that opens automatically each time a diagram is opened)
is what the help says. Nothing about any constraints.

So I tried what Override Default Toolboxes tells:
Quote
For example, the profile diagram's Notes field could resemble the following:

RedefinedToolbox=UML::Class;Alias=Class;Notes=Structural elements for Class diagrams;
with
Quote
RedefinedToolbox=UML::Requirements;Alias=Requirements;Notes=blabla;
again with no success. The default toolbox still looks like the default toolbox.

P.P.S. Not adding insult to injury but the _defaultDiagramType does also not work. At least when you try to add your own diagram types. It goes without saying... The help says:
Quote
The following initial values for _defaultDiagramType should be used to refer to Enterprise Architect's inbuilt diagram types:
. If my English is not too bad then should is not must. It's recommended but not mandatory.

138
Bugs and Issues / Locked property
« on: March 09, 2012, 03:21:47 am »
Has anyone successfully used the Element.Locked property with Require Lock to Edit? A non-locked element returns 1 (true) while a locked returns 0 (false). I tried setting a non-locked element to 0 and update. But the lock did not change.

(I guess it's simply not working and I need to write a SQL by myself.)

q.

139
Bugs and Issues / Importing a whole model from an XMI
« on: February 25, 2012, 02:30:13 am »
Maybe it's just me being too brain damaged. However, I just made the following observation: From a (not too small) model which I copied from somewhere I imported the root XMI which contains the whole model. Right after the import I ran a baseline compare and - oh wonder! - got a lot of differences. Not only the style of many connectors was indicated to be different (why? a fresh import of the very same file). There were also complete packages missing!!!

So I re-imported the XMI into that model - now not from scratch but with most (!) of the elements/packages already existing. This import also imported the missing packages! (The style of a couple of connectors still is indicated to be different, though.)

So what is this? Normal behavior? Strange earth waves? Has anyone else encountered this?

q.

140
Bugs and Issues / Actor "lifeline" in sequence diagram
« on: February 23, 2012, 03:42:26 am »
I noticed that when using an Actor from the toolbox the diagram does not show the classifier but only the object name (and there without leading colon). Is that only for my installation or could someone confirm that behavior? If so I'll submit a bug report.

q.

141
Bugs and Issues / Information Flow Realized in messages
« on: February 23, 2012, 04:30:41 am »
To show information items flowing at an association you need to combine a connector/association with information flow(s) via Information Flows Realized in the advanced context options. That will give you a filled triangle showing the item(s).

Now in sequence diagrams you seem to be able to do the same. The Advanced/Information Items Realized is available. You can also attach information items and this results in a dashed connector free flowing near the message. But each time you try to enable the flow again via the context it does not change anything.

I thought it would be a nice feature to show an information item flowing as message instead of an operation of the receiver. However, I haven't seen anything the like in Superstructures. So the EA implementation seems to be a bug.

Thoughts?

q.

142
Bugs and Issues / Moving association/information flow buggy
« on: February 10, 2012, 10:13:08 pm »
I just submitted a bug related to moving a connector with information flows realized. Here are the steps:

- create two classes A and B
- draw an information flow from A to B
- choose Add and create a class C and close the dialogues
- draw an association between A and B
- for the association choose Advanced/Information Flows Realized
(note that its quite annoying that both connectors overlay each other and you do not get the context menu for the association immediately. Instead often you must shift one connector to reach the other which is very user unfriendly)
- now check the C class
- create a class D
- move the source end of the information flow/association from A to D
- note that the displayed connector shows connected from D to B
- select class A
-> in the Relationships window you see that  the information flow has not been moved!

As a work around I hide the association, move the information flow too and unhide the association. I lost quite some information flows after deleting the A classes until I noticed the source of the problem.

This handling is by far not optimal. I think there could be much better solutions to handle realized information flows.

I guess not too many use this feature as it's really hard to create and handle these associations. But to those which are using it: what do you think? Are you happy with the current handling?

q.

143
Bugs and Issues / Opening Structured Scenario
« on: May 06, 2011, 10:34:40 pm »
When you open the Scenarios tab of a Use Case it seems that EA chooses to open the Description or Structured Specification at random. At least I could not find any rule which one is opened at first.

I thought it would make sense to open Description if it's not empty or Structured Specification vice versa (probably giving the later priority if both have data).

Should I report this as bug or do I miss something?

q.

144
Bugs and Issues / Missing Note (Text, etc.) elements in browser
« on: March 31, 2011, 01:50:58 am »
As you know there are a couple of elements which do not appear in the project browser. These are at least Notes, Texts and Boundaries. These explicitly belong to a single diagram (well, more or less as you can re-use them in other diagrams too). However, once you create those elements they lurk around in the model SOMEWHERE. Usually the place is the package where the parent diagram had been located. When you move the diagram, those children stay in the old package. And you don't have a chance to move them along with the diagram. And that is bad.

When I create a documentation I sometimes like to render notes as text along with the diagram for readability reasons. But when the notes are not "nearby" the diagram it will confuse the reader.

Now my question: why not having these elements as siblings of diagrams in the project browser? I don't think it is correct to hide just some elements.

Any opinions?

q.

145
Uml Process / Definition of Decomposition Icon
« on: December 06, 2015, 10:40:34 am »
Does anyone know where the Decomposition Icon in UML 2.5 is defined? I found only one reference in Fig. 14.8 on p. 320.

q.

146
Uml Process / Can instances head lifelines in sequence diagrams?
« on: November 08, 2015, 07:42:54 am »
I stumbled over this interesting question on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/grp/post/1330747-6068850012656250883

Now looking at EA there has always been some (confusing) mix of instances and lifelines. But if I interpret the current UML spec correctly lifelines and instances are different concepts. And thus instances must not appear in SDs.

147
Uml Process / Constraints in use cases
« on: September 23, 2015, 06:56:30 pm »
I needed to show pre- and post-conditions for use cases on a diagram and thought it would be neat to use the Link to Element Feature. But this raised two issues:
  • The notes don't seem to show which kind (pre/post/invariant/OCL) the selected constraints are. Any way to show them except adding an additional manual note?
  • Right after the constraint text EA renders a colon. What is the rationale for this?

q.

148
Uml Process / Association ownership
« on: May 18, 2015, 09:43:32 pm »
In SS 2.5 (ptc/2013-09-05) they introduced a dot on the association to show ownership (p. 209). By accident I got one association to show that dot. As for that time I did not know its meaning I got rid of it be deleting the connector and creating it new. Now, after reading about the meaning, I would like to know how to create that dot.

149
Uml Process / Use of XMI 1.1
« on: April 13, 2013, 02:56:51 am »
I'm currently writing a compiler that creates a XMI ready for import by EA. The default is XMI 1.1. It looks pretty much straight forward so the XMI is imported by EA with no issues. However, I wonder how long XMI 1.1 will stay in place. At OMG there does not seem to be any legacy document left over for 1.1, they start at 2.1. Does that mean that XMI 1.1 is obsolete and I should move to at least 2.1? Or maybe someone can point me to the XMI 1.1 specification?

q.

150
Uml Process / Exposed functionality from interfaces at ports
« on: April 30, 2013, 11:45:59 pm »
I have a rather strange issue. Or simply my memory is deceiving me. I tried this with v10 and 9.3: I have an interface (say IF) which provides some methods. And a class CLS with a port which itself contains a provided interface (say PIF). PIF is not only classified but has a Realize relation to IF. Now when I put CLS onto a sequence diagram and send a message to it, the drop down does not show the methods available from IF. Only if I show PIF within its port attached to CLS it is possible to utilize the methods from IF. But that rather clutters the sequence diagram. I'm pretty sure that I've seen the IF methods even at the CLS instance in a former EA version. Seemed logically to me as the CLS should have all the methods available it provides through its various exposed interfaces.

Another peculiarity which hit me here: it is not enough to classify PIF with IF in the Exposed Interface dialog. You must draw a Realization from PIF to IF in order to see IF's methods at PIF. So why create the classification if it does not provide the methods? Just for the name?

I'll try that with a former EA version (if I find the download link). However, it would be nice to know what's happening here.

q.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 13