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.
Related
I was wondering if it was possible to have differences between my conceptual model and the class diagram?
In the conceptual model, I explain that the user can create a message.
But in the class diagram the user must go through a class that contains all methods of creating a "ManageMessage" message.
here is an example
Can you help me ? Thank you
It's up to you how you show your classes in different diagrams. So in one you can show detailed attributes and operations and in another you show just the class name. However, in most cases it's better to create domain model which focuses on business aspects in the beginning. It does not have technically imposed structural elements and mainly you use attributes (YMMV). Later you derive a technical design from that model where you create a copy that links back with <<trace>> dependencies (UML tools offer transformation for that). Although you have to (mostly) manually synch the two models it's best to communicate with either business and developers.
N.B. about your design above: A message with zero related users does not seem to make much sense. Also you should not use the shared aggregation since it has no defined semantics.
I am looking for the best solution to draw mapping diagram in EA. I find that composite structure diagram might suits my needs. I have even found good example of such diagram on the net:
(Original source: http://www.dthomas.co.uk/dtalm/images/eshot/test/data_map.JPG)
This diagram was fully created in EA (as author claims). However I am not able to attach 'represents' relation to the attribute. Does any one know how to do that (I am talking about those little open squares in class representations).
Thank you in advance for your answer.
Good question!
I found your answer in Google Groups:
draw a dependency from one class to the other.
Then Right Click on the left side of the dependency and chose Link to Element Feature, chose Attribut and then select your attribute.
On the right side the same procedure.
On my EA 10 (Corp.Ed.), I was able to reproduce the described steps. See attached image.
I just downloaded EA and created a simple example by creating :
one class with a part
one collaboration with also a part
one 'represents' relation by using the command highlighted
Hoping it helps,
EBR.
PS: it is out of the scope of your question but what is the goal of this mapping diagram? It is just curiosity..
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 :-)
Can anyone tell which UML diagram I should change if there is a slight change in the design of application.
The change is -> Earlier the application was using Active directory for authentication now I want to use the Membership provider instead.
I want to keep the change minimum in diagrams.
Thanks
Sounds like component diagrams or class diagrams. Check out the following topics and illustrations for VS 2010 Ultimate RC:
UML Component Diagrams: Reference at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd409390%28VS.100%29.aspx:
A component diagram shows the parts of a design for a software system. A component diagram helps you
visualize the high-level structure of the system and the service behavior that those pieces provide
and consume through interfaces.
UML Class Diagrams: Reference at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd409437%28VS.100%29.aspx
A UML class diagram describes the object and information structures used by your application, both
internally and in communication with its users. It describes the information without reference to any
particular implementation.
It will surely depend the diagrams at your disposal. Sound like a correction in one of the static diagram types, like the component diagram ...
This of course depends on how you structure your documents and your uml-diagrams.
In general I have a Conceptual model, Class Diagram and a Design Diagram which are diractly linked to the architecture. And then you should in most cases have System Sequence Diagrams and more. However, depending on how your structure is and to minimize the "changes" required.
I would suggest that you use something more generic for the parts that might be changed. Active Directory Authentication and Membership Provider Authentication is both Authentication methods, which means that you can, instead of displaying the whole sequence at the Authentication step, just use "Authentication".
Now, in the conceptual models and in the design + class diagrams, you will need to change and add some fields, tables or whatever is added. But it shouldn't matter if you need to add more or less, because the documents need to reflect upon your software as accurate as possible.
So, to minimize changes, use more generic types.
This is an embarrassingly basic n-tier question.
I've created a DAL project in VS2008 with subsonic. It's got a widget class, a widgetcollection class, and a widgetcontroller class.
I've created my Business logic project (no I can't put it in the same tier) that references it. Using certain business criteria, it selects a collection of widgets in a function that returns a widgetcollection.
My question is: how does my GUI layer bind the collection to a grid? I know that the widgetcollection is a valid datasource for a datagrid, but how does the GUI layer know what a widget and widgetcollection are? Surely I don't have to reference the DAL from the GUI, that negates the whole point.
Firstly, I dont think this is an embarrasingly basic n-tier question.
It is a very interesting subject and one I attempted to stimulate discussion for in the old Subsonic Forums.
I share your reluctance to expose my GUI layer to the DAL.
My GUI layer only talks to BLL using the vocabulary and topics of my own Entity Model and only returns my own entities or lists or in some cases Data Tables.
My BLL only talks to a MAPping layer which maps Fetches,Saves etc to the appropriate DAL CRUD methods and converts the returned Subsonic types to my Entity types.
In doing this I was suprised at how much of Subsonic I had to duplicate and at times I felt I was going down the wrong road, I am feeling more comfortable with it now, though it still needs refactoring and refining.
For example, finding a flexible, generic means of indicating to my BLL which row(s) I wanted returned in a fetch was a challenge I hadn't expected and I finished up writing a generic queryClass with fluent interface which looks a lot like a Subsonic Select.
FWIW, I think you are headed down the right track, I guess what you have to do though is decide how you want to define those Subsonic types to your GUI.
Rob has an interesting discussion you may be interested in.
(using SubSonic 2.x) In my BLL classes I have a property which gives an object reference to the relevant DAL class. My UI form has a reference to the BLL class, so from the form I can address the DAL properties and methods via .BLL.DAL.xxxx
FWIW, I have never managed to successfully bind a SubSonic collection to a DataGridView. As alternatives, I sometimes use the collections .ToTable() method to create a DataTable and then bind to that, or alternatively I manually bind using .AddRow()
Look at the documentation for IBindingList Interface in MSDN, it has a pretty good sample.
Create, for example, a CustomersList class in your model that uses a Customer class in your BLL. Bind the grid to an instance of the CustomersList class. The presentation layer has no knowledge of the subsonic table classes.
You probably need to use an Interface. You can easily create an interface based off of the Widget in your Dal(right click on the class and create an Interface from the class). Next take the Interface and add it to your Business Logic Layer or a seperate project just for interfaces. Once you have done that you can add a reference to the Interface both in the DAL and in the GUI. This can also help if you ever change your data storage from a Database to XML etc. etc.