[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [mdt-ocl.dev] First shot at impact analyzer doc
|
On 2/22/2011 10:39 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
> Hi Axel
>
> The diagrams are crisper, but still lack lines from my understanding of
> UML, but perhaps they are not UML diagrams. You need to define your
> notation. I recall that my PhD supervisor insisting that every diagram
> notation must be defined. The big advantage of UML, is that "UML" is an
> adequate notation definition.
Please note that there are class diagrams and collaboration diagrams.
The collaboration diagrams use the UML notation where each instance is
shown with name:Type. (Association) links are shown as lines without
arrows or multiplicities (with binary associations they naturally
connect exactly two objects).
The class diagrams, however, do have multiplicities and don't have
instance names as they depict classes/interfaces.
Maybe I should state clearly which diagrams are collaboration diagrams
to avoid confusion with class diagram notation.
Words have a natural order, so readers naturally read the story left to
right, top to bottom.
Pictures do not have a natural order, so viewers do not know where to
start. It is good to impose a primarily top to bottom and/or left to
right order to provide the story framework upon which detail can be hung.
Thanks for the primer on modeling... I don't think we should get carried
away discussing the general merits or downsides of the different forms
of notation. I still agree to your original comment that in addition to
the textual description a few diagrams may help the reader to grasp this
stuff.
Best,
-- Axel
