Am Donnerstag, 17. Juni 2004 03:02 schrieb Andrew Ross: > On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 04:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > To enhance the standard UML components a class should have a checkbox > > "Interface" to produce a dashed outline. It is not easy to create a > > class-like shape containing methods and attributes, stereotypes and that. > > What version of UML are you basing this on? In the current version of > UML (1.5) interfaces are indicated using the stereotype <<interface>>.
M. Fowler, K. Scott, Addison Wesley, "UML Konzentriert" (I only know the german title) and Bernd Oestereich, Oldenbourg "Objektorientierte Softwareentwicklung" refer to 1.whatever UML and prefer a dashed outline of interfaces. If you haver other stereotypes it's a bit irritating to find "interface" among them. It's only an enhancement, optional, some tools do it, I did it the past few years, looks a bit cleaner for people ignoring stereotypes. > > It's a bit early to be implementing UML 2.0, isn't it? After all, the > spec isn't even complete! UML 2.0 has a lot of new features which will never be used (IMHO). Who draws exceptions breaking threaded sequences and so on? I've needed Class-, Sequence and Activity Diagrams, Use Case only for sketching. Diagrams must be easy to understand, not fancy 3d rendered piles of crap. Who can insert a class diagram containing 25 classes or interfaces with attributes and methods into a normal PDF? (printable on A4, shippable as book, not as map *g*) > > > It's also not possible to create a new focus on an existing lifeline or > > connect a box to it (grouping, ok, but that's not it, not editable > > anymore). It's also possible to work around with another life line > > connected to the same class, putting it into background and so on... > > I agree with this. It is quite annoying (not to mention conceptually > confusing). > > > At least switch of any text related to UML-Associations until it works > > properly. Alignment is absolutely dirty and, as said before, no font > > properties can be changed. > > I wouldn't switch it off, since that would no doubt result in a bug > filed to have it added as a feature, even though it's already there > (although it could do with some improvement). There is already a bug or > two filed about text placement (roles, association names, and > multiplicities) for UML associations and messages: > Did'nt read this, sry. > http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65430 > http://bugs.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=118313 > > > If these little things would be done by releasing 1.0 or 0.94 or > > whatever, including a good documentation, 80 software developers would > > use this tool at work. I love it, it's so independent and absolutely slim > > designed, 3 already infected...(discoverd it by updating my SuSE Linux to > > 9.1) > > I'd be willing to try and convince our uni to ditch Visio (which none of > the staff know how to use anyway). I hate Rational (no interaction in already drawn sequence diagrams, only delete and redraw), dislike Visio (too much) and had to use Together. The best thing I ever saw was some nice Java-Tool, Composum. There you don't work diagram-based but document based. You can draw diagrams and insert them into the document editor. Best feature was to include different diagram figures into a sub-diagram and extract these sub-diagrams from the main diagram (only a thin outline, rubberband, marks included objects, looks like a package). Makes it easy to divide a digram into logical sub parts. > > Cheers > > Andrew > _______________________________________________ Dia-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dia-list FAQ at http://www.gnome.org/projects/dia/faq.html Main page at http://www.gnome.org/projects/dia
