Home » Modeling » Papyrus » Documentation generation(Add doc to each and every element)
|
| Re: Documentation generation [message #1021703 is a reply to message #1021611] |
Wed, 20 March 2013 14:37   |
|
Hi, Stefan,
UML provides a Comment element that is meant for informative
annotations or "documentation" of the kind you describe. Any element
can be annotated with a Comment.
Use the Comment tool in the palette to drop a comment onto the diagram,
and the Link tool to connect it to the element that it annotates.
HTH,
Christian
On 2013-03-20 11:49:51 +0000, Stefan Begerad said:
> Hi community,
> what I'd like to do is, add comments to each and every UML element;
> like a description. In UML, all elements can have a description. In
> Papyrus, I failed to add description to elements so far.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> In an ideal world, a documentation could be generated based on element
> descriptions.
>
> Does anybody have experience with this issue?
>
> Thanks in adavance.
|
|
|
| Re: Documentation generation [message #1063251 is a reply to message #1021703] |
Wed, 12 June 2013 20:29 |
 Simon Wright
Messages: 1
Registered: June 2013 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Christian W. Damus wrote on Wed, 20 March 2013 10:37UML provides a Comment element that is meant for informative
annotations or "documentation" of the kind you describe. Any element
can be annotated with a Comment.
Use the Comment tool in the palette to drop a comment onto the diagram,
and the Link tool to connect it to the element that it annotates.
Is this lack of full documentation abilities a UML2 feature or a Papyrus limitation?
Enterprise Architect supports documentation. In their XMI, the documentation of a Class, Package etc <element> appears as a documentation attribute of a child <properties> element, whereas the documentation of an <attribute> or <operation> appears as a <documentation> element with a value attribute; which seems needlessly different, so it may be an EA extension.
The other tools I'm acquainted with also allow documentation on most of the elements of the model. I'd expect to state what the point of a Package is, what a Class does, what each Attribute is for, what each Operation does, what the States in a state machine correspond to ... etc ... there is absolutely no way that Comments on a diagram can give this level of detail, and if you tried you probably wouldn't be able to see the actual model anyway!
|
|
|
| Re: Documentation generation [message #1063578 is a reply to message #1063251] |
Thu, 13 June 2013 12:46 |
|
Hi, Simon,
Comments don't have do be visualized on the diagram, so they needn't
cause clutter.
EA's dialect of UML includes a document attribute in every metaclass;
this is not UML.
The last time I used IBM RSA, it provided a documentation field on the
property sheet of every UML element. This was done by applying a
profile to every new UML model created in the tool and, when the user
entered text into the documentation field, creating (if not already
existing) a Comment on that element bearing a <<documentation>>
stereotype.
What RSA doas is the most UML-ish implementation: use a stereotype to
distinguish Comments that are intended as human-readable documentation.
Papyrus certainly allows you to implement exactly the same approach.
HTH,
Christian
On 2013-06-13 11:15:22 +0000, Simon Wright said:
> Christian W. Damus wrote on Wed, 20 March 2013 10:37
>> UML provides a Comment element that is meant for informative
>> annotations or "documentation" of the kind you describe. Any element
>> can be annotated with a Comment.
>>
>> Use the Comment tool in the palette to drop a comment onto the diagram,
>> and the Link tool to connect it to the element that it annotates.
>
>
> Is this lack of full documentation abilities a UML2 feature or a
> Papyrus limitation?
>
> Enterprise Architect supports documentation. In their XMI, the
> documentation of a Class, Package etc <element> appears as a
> documentation attribute of a child <properties> element, whereas the
> documentation of an <attribute> or <operation> appears as a
> <documentation> element with a value attribute; which seems needlessly
> different, so it may be an EA extension.
>
> The other tools I'm acquainted with also allow documentation on most of
> the elements of the model. I'd expect to state what the point of a
> Package is, what a Class does, what each Attribute is for, what each
> Operation does, what the States in a state machine correspond to ...
> etc ... there is absolutely no way that Comments on a diagram can give
> this level of detail, and if you tried you probably wouldn't be able to
> see the actual model anyway!
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Apr 16 06:13:47 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.71728 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
