The 1998 comments by Terry were due to the fact that Rose 98 didn't support
the correct UML symbols between use cases, so we had to kludge things.
"Correct" UML represents include/extend using stereotyped dependency
relations. Rose 2001 supports this notation.
Todd Dunnavant
Rational Software Corporation
Technical Lead, Texas/Oklahoma Geographic District
voice: 281-499-8789
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric D. Tarkington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:24 AM
To: ROSE_FORUM
Subject: (ROSE) Bar Bet #2
It's been months since Bar Bet #1 (which I really enjoyed, thanks), but
I guess everyone will forgive, since we are all too busy for humans.
Largely because I'm teaching the UML at Seneca College (School of
Computer Studies), I keep on asking basic questions over and over. The
instructors don't agree about some basic stuff, and neither does the
literature on the UML. We get down to the point where you can't appeal
to logic and you can't appeal to authority.
So, here's my latest vexed question: In use case diagrams, how do
association stereotypes know which way to go?
In VISUAL MODELING WITH RATIONAL ROSE AND UML, (c)1998, p. 34, Terry
Quatrani writes: "Uses and extends relationships must use stereotypes
because they are both represented by a generalization arrow."
In VISUAL MODELING WITH RATIONAL ROSE 2000 AND UML, (c)2000, p. 34,
Terry Quatrani writes: "Include and extend relationships must use
stereotypes since they are both represented by a dependency
relationship." The rest of chapter 3 contains examples that
consistently use a unidirectional association relationship, instead.
We're teaching an introduction to the UML using Rose, and we've been
treating include/extend as identical to uses/extends. So, reading
Quatrani, we get three options for which relationship "goes with"
include and extend stereotypes:
1. generalization (solid line, closed arrow)
2. dependency (dashed line, open arrow)
3. unidirectional association (solid line, open arrow)
Quatrani is a genuinely excellent resource, who gives a lot of her kung
fu along with the facts in her books. Which one of these options is
wrong? Is more than one of them right? Are uses/extends the same as
include/extend? When David Duchovny comes back, will there be another
season of X-Files?
There are actually two bar bets here. My final formulation is:
1. Uses/extends is the same as the newer include/extend.
2. Unidirectional association is the relationship to which these
stereotypes should apply.
As before, I won't tell what I think until the pressure becomes
unbearable.
-Eric
************************************************************************
* Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
* For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
*
* Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Archive of messages:
http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
*
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject:<BLANK>
* Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
*
*************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions.
* For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support
*
* Admin.Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Archive of messages:
http://www.rational.com/products/rose/usergroups/rose_forum.jtmpl
* Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To unsubscribe from the list, please send email
*
* To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Subject:<BLANK>
* Body: unsubscribe rose_forum
*
*************************************************************************
