I'm working on my graduation project which is an online quiz website. now i'm drawing the UML activity diagram but it gets too complex and i can't add more details because at the end it must be printed in the project documentation in A4 papers.
can i split the diagram into multiple diagrams?. and if i did this should i repeat the login/registration actions in the beginning of each diagram?
Use structured activities to form logical groups. You can instantiate these activities as call behavior actions where needed.
Assume you have an activity Login
(the lying 8 is an invention of Enterprise Architect to indicate an embedded diagram; not UML standard)
which looks inside like
(just very simplified).
Now you can instantiate that like
where the fork indicates the action is a call behavior.
Adding activity parameters it would even be possible to parametrize these. Just like you would do when calling a function in a programming language.
Related
I’m trying to prepare UML model for my project. It’s quite complex however I focus on one of use-case. In short term, use case name is “Edit patient results” and actor “Doctor” uses it. In fact, entering results triggers always the set of following actions:
List item
Normal Ranges calculation
Related Expression calculation
Interpretation merging
Assuming that I have my use-case diagram prepared as follows:
My questions are:
How shall I draw actions that are triggered automatically? As extended use-cases like this?
How shall I draw “Edit patient results” use-case realization? Each edit operation involves several software components interactions, shall I use collaboration diagrams? (how to join my main use-case with them), maybe something else?
How to draw sequence diagrams to show actions sequence and parameters passed? How to join these diagrams with my use-case.
What is the best way to show use-case realization
I'm using Enterprice Architect.
Thank You !!!
No. These are just activities which are part of scenarios inside the use case. Trying to make the use cases is functional analysis the wrong way. A use case synthesizes a number of steps under a common goal/added value.
A use case realization is a collaboration (bubble with dashed line border; along with the UC in the toolbox). The collaboration contains diagrams which show how the single classes communicate/collaborate to realize (parts of) the use case. Use a Realization from Collaboration to Use Case.
Put the SDs inside the collaboration and group/name them reasonably.
see above
As to your comments:
Edited 2.
I never found a good use for Collaboration Use and I've done a lot of successful UC modeling. So you can probably live without it as well.
Put Actions inside an Activity representing a scenario and connect them as desired. You might look into BPMN as well.
For eg: I have an activity diagram depicting the flow of an API. Now that API calls an internal/static function. So, is it possible to depict the called function activity diagram with the caller activity diagram?
There are a couple of ways to achieve nesting in EA. One would be to create an Activity for the sub-process and invoke that.
You can nest the actions in an activity and use that in the main flow as invocation (when dragging the Activity on the diagram use as "Invocation" rather than as "Link"). It then looks like
From the browser (well, it's EA) you can choose Add/Composite Structure Diagram. Here you can layout the subprocess (e.g. like)
When you double click the invocation it will open this structure diagram.
Additionally you can use this diagram and drag it onto the (enlarged) invocation so it would show its guts:
The way it's shown in uml-diagrams.org is not possible for the diagram representation in EA (or I don't know how to do that). However, you can add ObjectNodes to Activities from the browser's Add context menu. These can be use in the referenced way.
How do we represent in an Activity Diagram, which entities are to be accessed or updated? Is this is to be done as part of an activity diagram, or to be done separately?
You specify which Classes are accessed or updated using Pins on an Action or using an ActivityParameterNode on an Activity. Those Pins look like little squares on the periphery of the Action, or rectangles on the diagram frame of an Activity, and you connect OutputPins to InputPins using ObjectFlows (which unfortunately look just like the ControlFlows that connect Actions together). Here's an example from the UML 2.5 spec:
Now, to answer what I think you are really asking. I think you want to know how to navigate to instances of Classes in your model. To do that from an Activity, you use a ReadStructuralFeatureAction to read properties from the Class instance that owns the Activity you're specifying. The values flow out of an OutputPin. Using ReadStructuralFeatureActions you can navigate anywhere your instances allow. (Note that when a Property is owned by an Association rather than a Class, you use one of the ReadLink*Actions specializations of Action.)
Please see Part 4 of Conrad Bock's excellent series, UML 2 Activity and Action Models,
Part 4: Object Nodes for a better understanding.
You can use either
a dependency (dashed line) or
an object flow (solid line) to show that an action is interacting with an object or
an information flow (stereotyped with <<flow>>). This way you can specify one or more classes which control the information that is flowing (in the example it is FileTypeObject).
Should activity diagram include detailed information about how the system functions from the start of the application?
Say for example i am making a swing application in which the app loads a JList with images when the application opens, so should i specify that in activity diagram even though user isn't himself performing the task of loading the images in the JList.
Also should swimlanes in activity diagram be divided according to the possible classes my swing application might have.
For example having 1 swimlane for model, view and controller each in a simple swing application.
Below are the Image's that I made,
OR
I feel that even though the first image is correct,the second one helps me visualize how the class diagram is going to shape up in a much better way.
So should I use the second Image?
As always, the answer is "it depends." The level of detail is not dictated by the type of diagram, but the context in which the diagram is used.
If the diagram is intended to show the flow through a use case, it should probably restrict itself to showing the activities performed by the actor(s) and the system as a whole, rather than the parts of the system.
If on the other hand the activity diagram shows the flow through a use case realization, it should definitely show the different parts of the system.
Let's say that halfway through the project you decide to change the design and not use MVC. This means the diagram needs to be redrawn. If the diagram is part of a use case realization, that's to be expected (because that's what you've done, you've decided to realize the use case in a different way). But a diagram that's part of the use case itself shouldn't need to be redrawn just because you've changed the design; the flow of interactions between the actor(s) and the system-as-a-whole shouldn't change.
That said, MVC is such a well-known way of breaking down a user interaction that it may be permissible to go to that level of detail even in a use case. So, assuming that you're documenting a use case and not a realization, if in your project or company user interactions are always designed as MVC, then I say go right ahead -- but keep it strict and use "model" rather than "image service". If the decision to use an MVC design cannot be taken during the use case analysis phase, I'd advise against it.
Swim-lanes have absolutely no model meaning. They are just a line. I recommend to use pools/lanes which are (BPMN stereotyped) UML elements. They are classified accordingly (usually with an actor) and the single actions go into each of those. This gives the activity a clear structure and it also shows responsibilities.
I am new to UML designing and read few articles on this. bit confused where to start..
Do i need to prepare all of the UML diagrams for a web application or is some diagrams are only essential for an application.
Thanks,
Start from Use Case - define, who will use your application(actors) and what they will do with it(use cases). Also, join close use cases into subsystems.
Component diagram - what main parts the system has and what info they will send to each other and if some part belongs to another
Go on with State machine - define what states will have your components and on what reasons can they change they states to other ones.
Deployment diagram will define on what PCs will these components live and about the connections/protocols/interfaces between them
Plan your user interfaces - now only the set of pages and frames and navigation between them and commands on them. Do not solve placing and colors yet
Class diagrams for every component
If for for some of your classes some instances are specifically important, use object diagram.
Draw the look of the UI
Code.
UML is there to help you. Pick only what you need. You'll hardly ever need all diagram types. Plus, it is convenient for the reader if he needs to know only a predefined UML subset to understand your draft.