Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
i am sorry for asking such a straight forward and simple question but there is a lot of confusion regarding the use of partition in activity diagrams like :
is it really necessary to create partitions?
since each organisation has a number of working units/sub-units,and eventually they will have roles to play,would we
need to create partitions in literally every activity diagram we draw
for any process flow?
e.g- suppose we have draw an activity diagram for online shopping .customers browse and search for items and later buy it .now there are very fewer roles here so we can clearly draw the diagram without partitions but still we can create them ,in both case they will represent the system so does it really make sense to create them.
The answer to both questions is No.
Partitioning is an optional feature for an activity diagram.
UML is most of all a means of communication. When partitioning adds useful information to the ddiagram, then you should include it. When it doesn't add anything to the message presented by the diagram, then you don't add it.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am creating a sequence diagram for an alarm system which involves a few different states and events which cause different behaviour depending on the state.
I am wondering the best way to present it. I planned on creating reference sequences to common events - such as entering a pin, a sensor going off and the alarm being activated - along the path of 'no fault'. This would be the alarm being off, being armed and then being turned off again. Without the alarm being set off by the sensors or pin entry failure.
Here's what I've got so far. Is there a better way (I will obviously define the reference sequences) or is this clear enough?
My approach to this is to keep sequence diagrams limited to a single level. The sequence diagram should only describe the behavior of one operation of one single class. To describe behavior of other operations of the same or other classes I use different sequence diagrams.
Furthermore I try to limit the number of messages in a sequence diagram to something like 15 or so. In general my rule is that I should always be able to print a diagram on A4 size and still be able to read it. If not there's too much on the diagram and it should be divided over several different diagram.
More details can be found here: UML Best Practice: One Operation => One Sequence Diagram
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I just drew an activity diagram, and I have 14 actors in my case. (I am making an activity diagram of online shopping site.)
Anyway... I am facing a problem with it, I am curious whether I must draw all actors in my diagram.
I have few system actors, so I am confusing how I place those actors between normal actors and system actors.
There are seller, non-seller who only buy products, and a manager who checks product posts. And finally I have to draw shipping system, certifying credit system, and more.
Thank you.
Well, I would say your use case is cut the wrong way. If it involves 14 actors then it looks like a pot of spaghetti and you did not sort out well. Look at the use case and try to find out what is wrong. There should not be more than 3 actors involved.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to know what kind of diagrams I should use in each step of a project lifestyle, for example in the first step I should do the use case diagram, but what diagrams should I do after this step, for example what diagrams I should use during the analyse of the project, the design, etc.
First of all you should decide which process model you want to use. Let it be Waterfall (not recommended), V-Model, Scrum, Unified Process, Rational Unified Process, etc.
Then you can start talking about first, second step and so on, because the steps depend on the process model that you use.
These diagrams you're referring to are also called artifacts, and you should only use them, if you need them and if they create value (more understanding for example), you should not use them just to have done it (only if it's an academic/school project and you want to learn).
If you want to improve your knowledge in that certain area, there are several good books out there, e.g. Applying UML and Patterns: An Introduction to Object-Oriented Analysis and Design and Iterative Development by Larman.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Am kind of new to sequence diagrams and am a bit confused with sequence diagrams. I have a system where an administrator will manage the system, so my problem is if i am drawing a sequence diagram for my system , should i show the administrator interacting with all the features in the system ?
For example i have only shown administrator interacting with registering a new patient feature only , but there are other features as well such as managing records , register new doctors , so should i show the interaction with those features as well ? Or only the main features ?
Thank you for your time.
UML is not Bible. Feel free while using it.
If your diagrams get complicated, then show different aspects at different diagrams.
And this is generally better.
So it is OKEY to show "register new doctor" and "manage records" in different sequence diagrams.
There is no obligation such that you have to show everthing in a single diagram.And for each diagram you should also not have to show "everthing". It is okey to filter unnecessary details: to prefer not to show them based on modeler view. Because UML is just a visual thinking and communication tool.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
http://www.iraqup.com/up/20120410/0iBvE-M60l_102420431.GIF
Here is an image for a system used in X company and the use case for it is (List Department’s Employees). The administrator identifies the department ID number. The system displays all employees in that department.
For this question you should use a scenario based on a single department represented by an object department7 which has a number of employees represented by the objects employee3, employee6, and employee11) and we need to draw object diagram and a sequence diagram.
I used UML use case diagrams and what should I do to understand this from scenario
The object diagram
It looks like a class diagram. What is there to extract?
The tool which allowed you to create the diagram should have source code generator. I used Enterprise Architect some time back--it was good.