I want to define some constraints for my profile. For example I need a constraint for a stereotype of the metaclass "connector". I want to define that these element must have one source like the oclkindof(source) and one target like the oclkindof(target). I found some texts by using the Google search engine like http://modeling-languages.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/OCLChapter.pdf or http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/2.0/ and other slides and papers but not the right description of OCL for me.
Best regards
How to attach OCL constraints to metamodels (e.g. via stereotypes) used to vary from tool to tool.
For your project, using the Eclipse Papyrus project should suffice, which should support what you need.
In Papyrus, you can also try out OCL queries in the console on the current UML model before you store them in the profile.
Related
Is there any standard to display features(use cases) that I want to add to system in next version in use case diagram?Or I have to display them for example with specific color,shape or ... ?
There is no standard here.
What I do in such cases is to create a profile that contains stereotyped elements like <<enhancement>> <<feature request>> etc. which simply extend the class meta class. I link them via a (<<trace>> stereotyped) dependency to the relevant element (like e.g. use cases).
The advantage is that I can add tagged values where I can set additional information like target build, responsible, etc.
It's true, there is no standard.
Using colors is a handy approach because changes are visible at a glance e. g. when shown in presentations. Assuming of course that you are not yet using colors for other semantic purposes.
You can also use UML notes.
Generally it makes sense to have diagrams versioned, so you can trace back diagram and model changes.
Some tools allow to store a version in the elements' metadata but you need to check where these can be used, because they are not necessarily visible in your diagrams as well.
I'm currently in a project where I have been asked to create a logical data model in UML. Now i've defined all my logical data entities and know all my attributes i'm just a little lost on how I can map these attributes to the UI.
The point of the exercise is to prove all the attributes in the requirements have been met in the system we have chosen to deploy. Happy to supply more information.
The application I am using is Enterprise Architect.
This question was solved the Enterprise Architect Support Forums.
Connect both classes with an association
Right click the assoc. near the class with attributes
Context menu/Link to Element Feature
Attributes
-> select the one and the assoc. is attached to it
There is an elegant approach which is to use Database stereotypes in your class diagram on attributes and then map it to java ORM annotation in the code.
I don't think EA can do this ORM mapping but other tools can.
Do you have artifacts in your model for the UI, too? That is, as a screen mock up or as a class model of the underlying UI classes? If yes, then you may find it very helpful to establish a traceability for your artifacts using a realization or dependency relationship.
You can further support that by creating requirement entities (in a SysML requirements diagram) and drag'n'drop the respective requirement onto the entity which provides a solution to it. This is described on page 31 in the following EA whitepaper: http://community.sparxsystems.com/whitepapers/Requirements%20Management%20with%20Enterprise%20Architect/Requirements_Management_in_Enterprise_Architect.pdf
I made a screenshot for you of how this looks, but unfortunately I am not yet allowed to post it here since I am a new member. Maybe you can get a rough idea from this screenshot I found on the web: http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/enterprise-architect/images/traceability_lg.png
That mechanism works on class level. On the attribute level you may want to add a link to specific related (requirements) elements in the notes field, if necessary.
I want to represent UML models in a serialized document using the most standard conventions available. I am looking for a canonical schema document that explicitly dictates the best way to do this. I suspect that, if such a document exists, then it would be written in either XSD, RDF and OWL. So far, I have only been able to find OMG specification documents and academic papers on the subject. I have found some XSD schemas, but they only apply to a particular aspect of the implementation.
Is there a canonical document schema? Where can I find it? If not, what are the most common representation formats and where can I find their schemas?
Are there any libraries that facilitate the generation of mappings from well-formed documents of this kind to graphical representations (e.g. SVG)? The library would ideally be .NET compatible, but this is not a requirement.
Are you looking for XMI (XML Metadata Interchange)? It's an OMG spec for XML representations of UML models; the current version appears to be 2.4.1, and the spec page links to two XSD schema documents.
In theory, XMI should answer part of your first question. XMI is not, however, without perils. From my own experience trying to achieve exactly the same, I would think that the first thing to do is to understand what others did about it, and how these standard documents would be used. These days I would suggest a system setup that involves IBM RSA and Sparx Enterprise Architect (eval versions available, registration may be required, and I am not affiliated with any of these companies). Build at least one comprehensive UML model which would give you the coverage you need, in one tool, then use the XMI export/import function to move the model between them. See what happens. Take a look at a company such as this (the makers of TOOLBUS, not affiliated with them) and think how XMI should affect their business model, and yet it seems that it doesn't...
I would think that success is achievable, but may prove feasible for a (very) narrow scope - scoping is key here.
As for the second part, I don't think you're going to find it, particularly for .NET.
XMI is the keyword you need. But XMI specifies only the document format. It does specify the document structure or contents. The UML metamodel does this. A library which does both for you is org.eclipse.uml2 - it implements the UML 2.4 metamodel and allows to store and restore it in XMI. IBM RSA uses this library as well. As several other Java Tools do.
I'm not aware of a UML2 implementation in a .NET language.
I'm a total rookie in UML and modelling. I'm learning some framework, and I'm trying to grasp and outline its key aspects. I've decided to do it with UML. But the problem is, the whole structural diagram of the framework is of no use to me, because classes have a lot of properties and methods, and there's a lot of classes.
What I need is a series of structural diagrams, each of which shows some specific aspect of the framework. And the classes involved should display only those attributes/operations that are of certain value to this specific aspect.
Does UML (as a standard) supports this on some level, and is there some tool that allows to do just that? I've tried Visio 2007 and Enterprise Architect, but I didn't found out the way to do what I need.
Thanks in advance.
What your are looking for seems to be able to customize views of your model and not to visualize the full class diagram. This concept is developed by Omondo which provides customizable views of your model by drag and drop. You can create as many views as needed, each could be different from the others while just using the same model element. This also the metamodeling approach for me where the model is not the diagram but the metamodel on which your build your graphical model.
If you don't need attributes/methods then you can try to click directly on attributes and methods keeping the ctrl button pressed, then you should be able to find a menu in the class diagram to hide them. The traditional menu is Hide from diagram.
This is what I do and it works really well.
You can also just click directly on attributes and methods but I don't see any documentation on this subject. It seems that nobody knows except the developer and myself about this option but this is my favorite one :-)
I designed a data model which is represented by an XSD scheme.
The data model also provides the types that are being used as web service parameters in a WSDL descriptor.
I would like to send the XSD scheme around and ask the people involved to peer review the data model.
What tool or presentation method would you suggest to be used as a basis for peer reviews? The data model should be readable for non-skilled people, at least when it comes to the semantic meanings of the parameters
Edit:
To be more specific: Of course, syntactically, the scheme validates. Actually I'm already working on code which is based on JAXB generated classes. My goal is
to freeze the data model and thus
the input parameters
to make sure
nothing got lost or forgotten from a
semantic (in the meaning of
business-relevant) point of view.
Edit 2
I've been thinking about how it probably would be best to spread a datamodel around. I'm thinking of something like a JavaDoc for XSD schemas. Anyone knows if something like that exists? Basically it would be done with a set of XSLTs, right?
I know the following tools that generate documentation from XML Schema files (XSD):
xs3p
XSLT stylesheet that generates single XHTML from XSD
xsddoc
free / LGPL
mainly XSLT based
JavaDoc like output
see xsddoc examples
xnsdoc
improved commercial version of xsddoc
free for personal/educational use
JavaDoc like output
XSDdoc 2.0
commercial
JavaDoc like output
For small a XML schema, I would probably suggest using the xs3p XSLT stylesheet. For more a complex schema, I suggest using xsddoc.
I recommend using the XSD for something. Specifically, show some actual applications, with examples as real code.
Actual applications are what make a schema interesting. The examples don't have to be big, sophisticated or completely realistic. They just have to compile. Other people will want to copy and paste the code samples.
These examples are the "hello world" of the schema. And they act as a kind of unit test for the schema.
The closest thing to Javadoc for an XML schema that I've seen is running the Javadoc tool on source generated from the schema. This requires two things: 1) That your schema has internal annotation elements documenting it, and that 2) your source generator uses those annotations as Javadoc elements.
The very useful Oxygen XML developer also supports generating documentation, see
http://www.oxygenxml.com/xml_schema_documentation.html
(commercial, but there's a fully functional 30 day trial available)
I'll try it out now, need a simple way to generate a document with all types and available xsd:documentation description as a simple interface description...
** Disclosure : I work for Innovasys, the producer of the documentation tool mentioned below *
You could take a look at Innovasys Document! X. As well as automatically generating a structured and linked page for every element, simple type, complex type, group and attribute group it will also generate linked XSD diagrams (including sequences/choice etc.) and structure tables that include the annotations from your XSDs and make sense of the relationships between the elements in your schemas. The output is template based so you can adapt it to your preferred style and structure. It will build output to web ready html or compiled help files.
Uniquely it also includes a WYSIWYG editor that allows you author additional content to supplement the stuff that's automatically generated and the annotations from the XSD source - so you can provide additional contextual information for your peer review. There is also a Community Extensions feature that allows people viewing the generated output to record comments and feedback and that can be viewed and actioned directly from within Document! X.