How to alternate order in flowchart?
Imagine in the following flowchart,
"Want Fries" must be checked before checking "Want Drink". Now, I want to get an endpoint where, both of the conditions can be checked in any order. What should be the concise flowchart of it?
Update:
One possible diagram I made is the following but it looks not concise and also looks clumsy.
You can use fork and join symbols to represent parallel processing. It indicates the start or end of a section of processes that can be done independently. The UML notation for fork and join is a straight line.
See the below picture.
Please see the flowchart below:
Related
I am new in doing an activity and currently, I am trying to draw one based on given description.
I enter into doubt on a particular section as I am unsure if it should be 'split'.
Under the "Employee", the given description is as follows:
Employee enter in details about physical damage and cleanliness on the
machine. For the cleanliness, there must be a statement to indicate
that the problem is no longer an issue.
As such, I use a foreach as a means to describe that there should be 2 checks - physical and cleanliness (see diagram in the link), before it moves on to the next activity under the System - for the system to record the checks.
Thus, am I on the right track? Thank you in advance for any replies.
Your example is no valid UML. In order to make it proper you need to enclose the fork/join in a expansion region like so:
A fork/join does not accept any sematic labels. They just split the control flow into several parallel ones which join at the end.
However, this still seems odd since you would probably have some control for the different inspections being entered. So I'd guess there's a decision which loops through multiple inspection entries. Personally I use regions only for handling interrupts. ADs are nice to a certain level. But sometimes a tabular text (like suggested by Cockburn) is just easier to write and read. Graphical programming is not the ultimate answer (unlike 42).
First, the 'NO' branch of the decision node must lead somewhere (at the end?).
After, It differs if you want to show the process for ONE or MULTIPLE inspections. But the most logical way is to represent the diagram for an inspection, because you wrote inspection without S ! If you want represent more than one inspection, you can use decision and merge node to represent loop that stop when there is no more inspection.
I am reading a lot about Gherkin, and I had already read that it was not good to repeat steps, and for this it is necessary to use the keyword "Background", but in the example of this page they are repeating the same "Given" again and again, Could it be that I am doing wrong? I need to know your opinion about it:
Like with several things, this a topic that will generate different opinions. On this particular example I would have moved the "Given that I select the post" to the Background section as this seems to be a pre-requisite to all scenarios on this feature. Of course this would leave the scenarios in the feature without an actual Given section but those would be incorporated from the Background section on execution.
I have also seen cases where sometimes the decision of moving steps to the Background is a trade-off between having more or less feature files and how these are structured. For example, if there are 10 scenarios for a particular feature with a lot of similar steps between them - but there are 1 or 2 scenarios which do not require a particular step, then those 1 or 2 scenarios would have to moved into a new feature file in order to have the exact same steps on the Background section of the original feature.
Of course it is correct to keep the scenarios like this. From a tester's perspective, the Scenarios/Test cases should run independently, therefore, you can keep these tests separately for each functionality.
But in case you are doing an integration testing, then some of these test cases can be merged, thus you can cover multiple test cases in one scenario.
And the "given" statement is repeating, therefore you can put that in the background, so you don't have to call it in each scenarios.
Note: These separate scenarios will be handy when you run the scripts separately with annotation tags, when you just have to check for a specific functionality, or a bug fix.
I have a requirement to add fields onto a form based on data from another set of entities. Is this possible using an event script or does it require a plugin?
Given that I understand your assignment correctly, it can be done using JavaScript as well as a plugin. There is a significant difference that you need to take into consideration.
Is the change to the other entities to be made only when an actual user loads a form? If so, JS is the right way.
Or perhaps you need to ensure that those values are written even if a console client or system process retrieves the value of the primary entity? In that case, C# is your only option.
EDIT:
Simply accessing the values from any entity in the onload event can be done using a call to oData. I believe someone else asked a similar question recently. The basic format will look like this.
http://Server:Port/Organization
/XrmServices/2011/OrganizationData.svc
/TheEntityLogicalNameOfYoursSet()?$filter=FieldName eq 'ValueOfIt'
Some extra remarks.
If you're targeting on-line installation, the syntax will differ, of course, because the Schema-Server-Port-Organization are provided in a different pattern (https, orgName.crm4.something.something.com etc.). You can look it up on Settings.
Perhaps it should go without saying and I'm sure you realize it but for completeness' sake, TheEntityLogicalNameOfYours needs to be substituted for the actual name (unless that is your actual name, in which case I'll be worried, haha).
If you're new to this whole oData thingy, keep asking. I got the impression that the info I'm giving you is appreciated but not really producing "aha!" experience for you. You might want to ask separate questions, though. Some examples right off the top of my head.
a. "How do I perform oData call in JavaScript?"
b. "How do I access the fetched data?"
c. "How do I add/remove/hide a field programmatically on a form?"
d. "How do I combine data from...?"
My question actually consists of two questions regarding the same process modelling in an activity diagram.
The process in short:
Joe uploads a file into a portal, this portal transfers the file to our server where it is checked for errors. In case of an error the server sends a message to the portal where Joe can see this (if he is still logged in or on his next visit) and upload his file again (hopefully without the errors this time). In case of success the server will also notify the portal but Joe doesn't have to take any action so we are not interested in the result. As the file is okay the system now wait for Sarah who has to start the processing of the file manually after which the process completes.
In the below diagram I have drawn this, including my two problems.
Am I allowed to let the "Notify User of succes" (I spotted the spelling mistake, thank you) in the Portal swim lane to terminate like this? If I were to put a ActivityFinal behind this that would mean the entire process would end right there which is not what we want.
Am I allowed the to join before the "process file" without a fork or do I need a fork at the very start spanning all across form Joe to Sarah?
The point of this is nothing more than an attempt to find a valid UML solution to solve this, in my own diagrams I would just do it like in the example.
Thanks in advance!
I'm not sure if it forbidden to leave an activity node without outgoing links, but for clarity (since users may think this is a mistake) I would use a flow final node (circle with x inside). This node simply terminates the flow and does not affect other flows in the diagram.
You can use a join node anywhere you want, independent if you previously did a fork or not. So what you did is correct.
I would in that case make a arrow from 'Notify user of success' to the join element, delete the arrow from the fork to the join element, and create an arrow from the fork to 'Start process'.
As far as I know the join element must have a fork at some point before it.
You can have many activity end nodes in the diagram, but I think you can't have more than one start nodes.
You have no activities on the activities diagram, do you think it is OK? No.
When a lane receives something, it should be shown as message (writing on the arrow), not as an action. Sending and receiving are special things, that are shown not as actions, but as arrow ends or if they are important as activities' parameters - border rectangles.
As for fork/join combining, it is absolutely OK.
Here is an example diagram, I have put useful for you elements on it. It doesn't mean you should copy it, only use it as a source.
I have one dialog where user can perform activity like
"Add to Order"
"Show Item Detail in Full Screen"
"Perform Scrolling"
how do i show this choices in Activity Diagram user can perform any of this task as optional.
i though of using Fork/Join but isnt't it for parallel activity and these three seems not parallel activity please some one clear it :)
thanks
Use Decision node and Merge node.
Use Decision node and Merge node.
They are equivalent to if/then/else (or switch) statements.
For parallel activities there are Fork and Join
See the screenshot below (from VisualParadigm)
I'll like to add up one thing here that as its optional for user to explore any option so you can make an arrow from merge node back to first decision node.... as its upto user that whether aftr exploring one option, he wants to exit or explore another option