Am Donnerstag, 17. Juni 2004 12:38 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > 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. > > I'm afraid the official standard (v 1.5) is against you, see > http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/03-03-10.pdf, chapter 3.29. That said, I > don't think we've been striving to keep compliance with the specs > generally. >
Ok, I'll use stereotypes only *g* > >> 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*) > > I agree that there's no reason to implement UML 2.0 just because it's > there. If there's stuff in it that people actually use, then by all > means. But let's not bloat Dia with things that nobody uses. > > >> 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: > > The thing to do (and I'm mentioning this in bug 65430) is to have a > default placement but also a handle so the user can adjust it. Such a > handle is used in several other objects. The switch between automatically > placed and user-placed should be controlled in the same way as > auto-routing for zig-zag lines. Good little project for somebody with a > bit of time on their hands. On the other hand these properties are usless. I must use the text element to display multiplicities, roles and message names. > > >> 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) > > Can't guarantee anything, but quite willing to take in patches. 0.94 will > probably not contain much more than is in current CVS HEAD. 1.0 has a set > of goals mentioned on the Dia TWiki. > > >> 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. > > An oft-wished for feature: Heirarchical diagrams. Suggestions welcome. See new Thread... "An oft-wished for feature: Heirarchical diagrams. Suggestions welcome." C and C++ is not my favorite language, too much to worry about, otherwise I would do it :-). Maybe I'll learn it while improving dia. I'll have a look at the sources. > > -Lars > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
