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 - Glassboy

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 74
General Board / Re: Resizable pipe shape script
« on: October 03, 2018, 07:57:56 am »
Something about that approach makes the name subshape I added print at top left.  Any idea what?

Code: [Select]
AddSubShape("name", "center");
text name
h_align = "center";
v_align = "center";

General Board / Re: Resizable pipe shape script
« on: October 02, 2018, 07:19:36 am »
Thanks.  Right looks best with the existing deployment view shapes.  I noticed in the example you use an unspecialised node resized to be a rectangle but it doesn't look that great or really fit in on a nice tidy diagram :-)

General Board / Re: Resizable pipe shape script
« on: October 01, 2018, 12:51:02 pm »
Hmmm yes but going the other way.  That looks like a database :-)

General Board / Resizable pipe shape script
« on: October 01, 2018, 09:24:56 am »
Does anyone have a resizable pipe shape script like the Visio network icon?

If so can you post it here as I can't reach a lot of the file sharing sites from my work network.

General Board / Re: Systems Engineering Model pattern missing
« on: September 26, 2018, 09:40:19 am »
That would be worth contacting Sparx Support directly.  It's not something other users can help you with.

General Board / Re: More 'natural' curved connectors ?
« on: September 25, 2018, 12:39:48 pm »
It's very inconvenient to me as a user that I don't have a button for 'do all my work for the day'.

While managing the control points of a bezier when one end is moved doesn't fit into that level of difficulty, I don't think that there is a single "right" behavior. It may be feasible to make a better automatic choice, but I would expect that in many circumstances a user will still want to tweak it.

When you make the button, can it please pop up a paperclip avatar?

I DID send in a defect that the final compress should be part of the project transfer functionality, but I guess that was fixed in a different timeline (binge-watching Continuum on Netflix).

Highly dependent on your reference frame :-)

Bugs and Issues / Re: Space Horizontal Bug ?
« on: September 25, 2018, 09:28:01 am »
Yes I have seen behaviour like that.  What I do do as a matter of course when using things like the spacing functionality is make sure I have made  diagram elements - text and the like - non-selectable.  Sometimes you have accidentally selected something you didn't mean to.

Actually, it usually means that's what you asked for. It's not intrinsically wrong so there's no reason for EA to report it as an error.

Some kind of syntax checker would be nice, but it does have a pretty niche audience.

General Board / Re: Empty tags of a class not shown in diagram
« on: September 20, 2018, 09:48:02 am »
So just to be clear...
Technically, when you apply a stereotype to an element, you create an instance of that stereotype, which references the target element (a property). The tag is a slot referencing the property for that element, and the tagged value is zero or more instances of the property type.
I think my soul died a little.

Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: EA Integration without Add In
« on: September 19, 2018, 01:08:18 pm »
Running EA as service is almost impossible (though there a rumors that LieberLieber has some kind of solution).

Because it's not a daemon, it's an obese client application.

Bugs and Issues / Re: EA repository performance on Oracle db
« on: September 17, 2018, 06:55:57 am »
So, although it might be possible to tweak the database for EA, I've never come across a happy EA + Oracle user.
Most of them switch to MySQL or SQL Server at some point and are much happier after the switch.

I did have a file of suggested optimisations for Oracle but I appear to have lost it.  It ended up being easier to switch to MSSQL than to get an Oracle DBA's time to tinker.

"in titulo, ergo sum" (with apologies to Rene)
I like the Billy Bragg cover.

I'd suggest two things.  Firstly the larger view may satisfy a desire you have but may not be the best communication tool.  Secondly don't start at that point.  See if you can create a number of A4 landscape views of the major application components and the application services they serve.  Once you have those print them all out and see if you can add application collaboration elements in a way that make sense.

Then and only then jump up to your wacky strategy level capabilities.  You might find that your capability map might be better as a mapping of capability to application function, or to technology function if you are consuming web services.  It will also allow you to include missing functions that are not being provided but are needed for the organisation to have the capability.

Let's just say for the sake of the discussion that I have done those A4 views (full transparency, I have done some but not all) and, more importantly, have traceability from capabilities through business services & processes down to application services and the underlying components.  These are great to understand, analyse and discover impact - and architects love them.  But for other stakeholders they are often too abstract and too theoretical - they don't think in models, they understand what they can see and touch.  They understand capabilities, processes and applications / systems but they don't always 'get' what an application function or a business service is.

Yeah well what you are coming across is the fact that the claim that ArchiMate is an "enterprise architecture" notation is complete bullshit.  To get a sense just how incomplete it is have a look at the EBMM (  Nick left Microsoft and started his own company so the conversation we were having about the next version dried up (for example a business role may require a licence or a warrent which then traces back to a legislative edict).  But you can get a grasp from the ontology as it stands now, just how many gaps exist in ArchiMate (like modelling what people use products for).   

You don't have a model or element problem, you have a viewpoint problem which is fairly typical with ArchiMate.

That's a fair comment, and I will happily admit that I am stretching both Sparx and Archimate in my attempts to create views for a variety of stakeholders - architects and technicians but also a non-technical, executive audience.  My goal was to build a 'business friendly' set of views to communicate the implications of the current architecture, supported by the more detailed models.  I'll also admit that I have tried (and failed) to do this in the past with other tools and have always ended up needing to revert to providing a Visio / PowerPoint layer over the top due to various different limitations with the views achievable. Frustratingly I am very close to achieving what (I think) will work, but there are just that couple of limitations that make it not quite achievable.

The key at that level is less is more, especially in the structure elements.  Stick to only those "moving parts" that everyone knows about.  Make sure you have your detailed views to show when needed to illustrate you understand the environment (there are lots of shit architects out there that cause scepticism in business users).


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 74