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.

Messages - Gary W.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
Uml Process / Re: Mutually Exclusive Associations
« on: December 03, 2004, 11:09:15 am »

Wow, I never knew you could do that!!  Thanks, I think your solution is the way better than mine, and I'll start using this notation..


Uml Process / Re: Mutually Exclusive Associations
« on: December 01, 2004, 10:03:46 am »

UML has no notion of 'a set of mutually exclusive static relationships'.    In addition to Thomas' suggestion, you may be also to use OCL to denote this sort of thing.  You may already know about OCL, but if not, just google "Object Constraint Language" and you'll get lots of info.

Hmmm, in writing this post, I can't remember ever having to do this in my previous OO projects.  I wonder if the OO-style analysis and UML notation allows you to avoid this sort of construct???

Anyways, OCL may be the way to go, so you'll have to include the related 'OCL document' along with your class model to make a complete Requirements Analysis deliverable.


Uml Process / Re: How to model "IsATypeOf"
« on: January 17, 2005, 09:53:50 am »

You're running into the infamous 'object-relational impedence mismatch' problem.  It sounds like you're used to the Oracle Designer Database Design Transformer, which can create one of four supertype/subtype implementations.

Neithr EA, nor any object-oriented tool, can give you the same fine-grained level of detail.  

You can look at Oracle's 'TopLink' tool for one solution (i.e. stay purely relational but have a mapping framework on top of it).  There are many others, but having EA automatically generate DDL in this way is not really one of them =8^(


Uml Process / Re: RUP
« on: September 16, 2004, 01:42:59 pm »

Thanks.. I was just curious.  Of course, Ambler is just as, if not more, focused on Agile Methods than Fowler is.


Uml Process / Re: RUP
« on: September 14, 2004, 11:04:28 am »

>  As far as books are concerned  - I favour Rosenberg &
> Scott, Ambler, and Fowler (with caution).

Okay, having read these authors, and agreeing with your recommendation, I have to ask why the 'with caution' caveat on Martin Fowler?



We've successfully customized the DDL Transform to meet our specific Data Admin standards.  It was surprising easy (with Simon's help  ;D  ).

The one thing remaining is, how can we easily trace the 'Realisation' of the Class, to the resulting DB table?

I would have thought that this came 'for free', with the MDA transform, but now I don't think so.

So, I'm toying with the idea of adding code in the transform ("Class", "Attribute", and "Connector" templates) to add a Source -> Target "Realization" relationship.

My question to all is, do you think that is the appropriate relationship type?  What about "Instantiation", "Dependency" (other direction), "Deployment"?


Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: MDA "DDL" Transformation
« on: December 17, 2008, 09:57:27 am »
Kewl.. works exactly as you've described.   :D



Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: MDA "DDL" Transformation
« on: December 13, 2008, 10:21:03 am »
The foreign key name comes from the name in the source of the primary key.
Hmmm, are you sure this is the Foreign Key Constraint Name, not the Foreign Key Column Name?

We tried editing ALL the occurrences of "name=..", but nothing ever changed in the foreign key constraint name.


Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / MDA "DDL" Transformation
« on: December 10, 2008, 10:10:25 am »

We're trying to change the name of the Primary and Foreign Key Constraints (not columns), when doing an MDA "DDL" Transformation.

We've revised the "Connector" template, which seems to control the Foreign Key constraint name.   The default name is "FK_" prefixed to the concatenation of the two tables (e.g. FK_Dept_Emp).  

BUT.. No matter what we do, it seems to ALWAYS create this default naming.   :-/

Does anyone know where to look, to control the foreign key constraint name?

BTW, how about the Primary Key Constraint Name?  We've established that "Connector" template does NOT control this, but neither does the "Class" nor "Class Base" template.

Thanks for any help you can provide,
Gary   :D

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / V7.1 - RTF Reports Template
« on: June 12, 2008, 07:25:23 am »

I could have sworn there were old postings on how to work with the new reports template editor, but searches on 'rtf template', 'reports template', 'user case associations to' yielded nothing useful.

I'd like to create a template, based upon the standard {use case template}, that includes the 'associations to' of type 'Actor'.  Basically, list off the actor(s) that are associated with my Use Case.

The online tutorial seems a bit out of date, and doesn't address such an addition.   When I right-click on {Element.Name}, I see the the typical Name, Notes, Phase, Status, etc., but no way to traverse an associations table to include the 'Actors' involved.

Can anyone help?


P.S.  "Generate to HTML" Output does have this though.. but I don't know how to transfer this functionality onto the RTF Reports Generator.


EA does not export EMF compatible XMI.

In the above related thread (;action=display;num=1176326978), the answer is no.



> some visibility of some contents by other people
> on our Intranet

In my prior projects, I've published EA models on the web via "Project -> Documentation -> HTML Report".   You could upload this to your Sharpoint site.  This would only be for review, but no edits, nor any mechanism to track comments.  

You *could* export to a single document (i.e. "Project -> Documentation -> Rich Text Format (RTF) Report"), save it as Word and turn on its 'Track Changes'.  Once you've uploaded this to your Sharepoint site, Sharepoint would handle checkout / checkin / etc.

But I've never done the 'Track Changes' method.  I've always published the HTML for review, and then got together as a group to go through everyone's feedback.

> let team members edit

Well, I cannot see how Sharepoint would support EA's functionality in a shared enviroment.  EA's 'corporate edition' has some ability here, but it wouldn't be through Sharepoint.  Perhaps you should look at and



What exactly do you man by 'available'?  To publish to a larger audience?  To distribute the .EAP file?  To allow multiple users to edit/view the models within their own EA?


I'm actually in the midst of using XSLT to do the same thing.  Are you trying to parse and re-format or re-jig the XMI content?

This *should* work, although I'm having problems referencing the EA namespaces in the XMI file.

If I ever get this to work, I'll post it and perhaps you can re-use this.



Oops, never did reply back to your post.  Thanks for the vote of confidence for Automation under Word 2003.  I'm quite sure it's a problem on my end (i.e. user error).

I'll keep plugging away at it...


Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10