|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1826051 is a reply to message #1825132] |
Fri, 17 April 2020 18:21 |
|
Setting visibility to private in UML, as with any object oriented programming language does not make the item invisible. A private Java class as example is still visible in the editor.
To make an item in the diagram invisible, mark the item and open its context menu. Choose Filter and filter the content you want to be invisible.
In Papyrus as with many other UML tools the diagram is a graphical editor.
/Carsten
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1826078 is a reply to message #1826071] |
Sat, 18 April 2020 12:28 |
|
Carsten Pitz wrote on Sat, 18 April 2020 11:11Is the diagram synchronized?
If not try a refresh on the model.
If this does not work, file an issue.
/Carsten
Sorry, completely wrong answer from my side.
The accociation (uml::Association) is private. That is clear and shown on the left top of the properties menu.
But the member ends being uml::Properties are not. So Papyrus correctly shows the "+" to show these are public.
Setting the property representing the member end to private results in the wanted behavior.
/Carsten
EDIT: screenshot added
[Updated on: Sat, 18 April 2020 12:47] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1826096 is a reply to message #1826095] |
Sun, 19 April 2020 12:18 |
|
Hi Ed,
The "Profile" I referred to is
https://wiki.eclipse.org/Getting_Started_with_Papyrus_UMLLight
Yes, uml::NamedElement defines Visibilty. OK, then Visibilty is possible with a shared form.
Yes, even if IMHO opinion the usability of Papyrus is much better than the ones of IBM Rational Rhapsody, IBM RSA, Sparx Enterprise Architect, PTC UML Designer or VisualParadigm VisualParadigm it can be still improved.
On Papyrus useability
* Navigation is the best I have seen so far
* The magic connectors (as named by the ArchiMate specification) are fancy
* Window handling as derived from Eclipse RCP is top notch (i.e. multiple monitor support)
And functionality-wise Papyrus is IMHO far ahead of the crowd.
* model checking is the best I have seen so far
* OCL support is also the best I have seen so far (special thanks to you, Ed)
* Artifact generation (i.e. source code or office documents) is unparalleled.
* GIT support
* Source code editor support (JDT, CDT, web tools, ...)
Just to name a few.
/Carsten
|
|
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1826108 is a reply to message #1826105] |
Sun, 19 April 2020 17:49 |
|
Hi Eric,
just a small hint. The official UML 2.5.1 specification by the OMG is the IMHO best Papyrus manual. An uml::MemberEnd references two or more uml::Property elements as member ends. This gives you a strong hint that each member end is configured separately. Papyrus follows the UML specification more catholic than the pope.
/Carsten
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1826114 is a reply to message #1826107] |
Sun, 19 April 2020 18:33 |
|
Both Umbrello and BoUML only cover a small choice of what UML overs. Nevertheless I used BoUML a lot and really liked its simplicity. For more formal work back then I used ArgoUML. Later Eclipse Topcased which was superseded by Eclipse Papyrus. At customers I mostly use IBM Rational Rhapsody followed by Sparx Enterprise Architect.
/Carsten
|
|
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1827159 is a reply to message #1826212] |
Fri, 08 May 2020 14:29 |
|
Hi to all,
but especially to
Eric Cousin
Ed Willink
Thomas Wiman
Associations are a very special case. Being a mere line between to boxes for most UML users, reading the UML specification an uml::Association between 2 uml::Classifier elements involves at least 5 UML elements.
To start with the uml::Association itself. An uml::Association references 2..* uml::MemberEnd elements. Each uml::MemberEnd references an uml::Classifier element via type. Each uml::MemberEnd can be either owned by the uml::Association or by the uml::Classifier element it references via type. An uml::MemberEnd is an uml::Property element either being an ownedEnd or a navigableOwnedEnd when owned by an uml::Association. It is referenced via owned attribute if it is referenced by an uml::StructuredClassifier, an uml::DataType, an uml::Interface, an uml::Signal or an UML::Artifact. As a side note: Both uml::BehavioredClassifier and uml::InformationItem despite being specializations of uml::Classifier do not feature any means to own an uml::MemberEnd.
Given that uml::Association is a quite complex construct being able to mix -- using W3C XLink slang -- internal and external link nature. Given that -- and Papyrus supports that perfectly -- an uml::Association element within a model of a Papyrus project can "link" two or more uml::Classififier elements each being contained in different models in different Papyrus projects without touching the models containing the uml::Association elements. I personally use that feature quite often, as it allows to use models as libraries. The model containing the uml::Association elements assembles uml::Classifier elements (= (sub-)systems) to specify a more capable system. By not touching the models containing the sub-systems these models can be re-used in different contexts. Please refer to attached export for further information.
Back to uml::MemberEnd elements. As uml::MemberEnd elements might by owned by an uml::Association but can also be owned by an uml::Classifier element, I personally would prefer the uml::MemberEnd properties dialog to be a self-contained pop-up dialog referenced by both the uml::Association properties dialog and the uml::Classifier properties dialog.
/Carsten
EDIT example attached
-
Attachment: Assembly.zip
(Size: 6.36KB, Downloaded 65 times)
[Updated on: Fri, 08 May 2020 15:01] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1827207 is a reply to message #1827159] |
Sun, 10 May 2020 13:19 |
|
Carsten,
Thanks for an exhaustive elaboration of this topic.
I also think that the compliance with UML metamodel is very useful when it comes to organize the (sub)models and encourage reuse of classifier libraries.
The drawback is that a newcomer will find it complex and confusing if he/she only wants to draw a "line" between two elements.
I am glad that you agree on my opinion that properties involved in an association should be displayed in a dialog/view separately from the association itself.
/Thomas
Thomas Wiman
MetaModelAgent Product Manager
|
|
|
Re: How to change visibility of association member ends ? [message #1827208 is a reply to message #1827207] |
Sun, 10 May 2020 14:00 |
|
Hi Thomas,
I think we had this topic before in a different context.
In my 20+ years experience with UML the adopters I met either just wanted to draw some pictures or wanted to go MDA. So far I haven't met anyone in between.
Both are completely different markets.
The painters market is occupied by plantUML, Sparx EA and the like.
The MDA market is occupied by IBM Rational Rhapsody and Eclipse Papyrus.
There is a Papyrus UML light version. Or at least there was such an initiative. But I am only aware of the first publishing. I think it is discontinued. That Papyrus UML light aimed at the IMHO non-existent group of people in between. Nevertheless the Papyrus UML light might evolve into a simple drawing tool. Omitting all the model checks the full blown Eclipse Papyrus does. The users are only interested in getting some pictures they can drag and drop into a Word document. And I know many of them. No one of them ever seeked for more than a few paintings.
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06000 seconds