Book a Demo

Author Topic: 1301: Realisation vs Realization for QuickLinker  (Read 5245 times)

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8607
  • Karma: +257/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
1301: Realisation vs Realization for QuickLinker
« on: June 30, 2016, 09:49:25 am »
Yes Geert, the old realisation vs Realisation issue rears its ugly head again...

We have developed a QuickLinker Generator that allows us to take the ArchiMate 2.1 & 3.0 relationship tables (located at the end of the specifications), and generate the appropriate QuickLinker entries for the MDG.  This is being done at the same time we're testing 1301.  As we know the QuickLinker will "silently" fail - so when things didn't "pan out" we sat glum faced...  We know how hard it is to debug this stuff!  :(

Our generator uses a whole pile of preferentially integral tables to ensure that everything is CONSISTENT!  Initial visual inspection of the gernated file showed that structurally it was correct.

Eventually we tracked it down to the relationship type for Realizations...  Everywhere else in EA (as far as we can tell) you have to set it to the incorrect (Realisation), BUT in the QuickLinker it has to be the correct (but inconsistent) Realization! ???

Sparxians, you need to change the QuickLinker processing to allow BOTH.

My tag line applies here...

Reported,
Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!

Geert Bellekens

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 13449
  • Karma: +571/-33
  • Make EA work for YOU!
    • View Profile
    • Enterprise Architect Consultant and Value Added Reseller
Re: 1301: Realisation vs Realization for QuickLinker
« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2016, 12:48:05 pm »
Yes Geert, the old realisation vs Realisation issue rears its ugly head again...

Whenever I deal with Generalization, whether it is code, or a query, or a template, I always make sure to include both variations just be be on the safe side. (I don't want to bother check which variation applies in these circumstances, and whether or not there might be ancient erroneous instances lurking around)

Same thing with Association and Aggregation

Geert

Paolo F Cantoni

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 8607
  • Karma: +257/-129
  • Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
    • View Profile
Re: 1301: Realisation vs Realization for QuickLinker
« Reply #2 on: June 30, 2016, 02:10:02 pm »
Yes Geert, the old realisation vs Realisation issue rears its ugly head again...

Whenever I deal with Generalization, whether it is code, or a query, or a template, I always make sure to include both variations just be be on the safe side. (I don't want to bother check which variation applies in these circumstances, and whether or not there might be ancient erroneous instances lurking around)

Same thing with Association and Aggregation

Geert
Unfortunately with the QuickLinker, you can't.  If you put the wrong one in, everything AFTER than bad entry is ignored!  :'(

That's a second order defect!

If I get a confirmatory response from Sparx, I'll add that.

Paolo
Inconsistently correct systems DON'T EXIST!
... Therefore, aim for consistency; in the expectation of achieving correctness....
-Semantica-
Helsinki Principle Rules!