Telling you how to divide your packages is like telling you how to structure
the directories on your computer. It's a matter of taste and style, but in
this case others will be browsing your files later, so choose wisely.
That being said, By use case or by actor? Neither. If you do that, you'll
likely end up with so many packages as to have no new clarity.
Some people create a single package for all their actors, and visually model
them, including any hierarchies. Like an org chart of the actors of the
system.
Then they create a package based on the type of use cases they have. You
could say Student Use Cases, and put all the use cases for the Student actor
in there. But you could also say Registration Use Cases and mix and match
use cases for different actors that have goals with respect to registration.
Another group is often System Maintenance Use Cases, where any use cases
that are about maintaining system data using the system software itself is
put.
So break things up in a way that makes sense. Remember it is just like
making sub directories. Make it easy for me to find the use cases I am
interested in by browsing your package structure.
--anthony
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 2:58 AM
> To: Rose Forum (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: (ROSE) Use Cases for Rose itself?
>
>
>
>
> I am making use cases for a system with many different kinds
> of Actors, that
> have both similar options and very different ones. To put
> this all in one
> Use Case-diagram makes it rather complex.
>
> So I would like to divide this in different packages.
> Im just wondering which method would work best for this.
>
> Possible options:
> - Make packages of all options/use cases... and then put all
> Actors in the
> diagram with the Use cases they have in common ...
> example:
> (Package Use Case 1)
> Actor1 \
> Actor2 - Use Case 1
> Actor3 /
> (Package Use Case 2)
> Actor1 \
> Actor2 - Use Case 2
> Actor3 /
>
> - or make Actor-based packages, and make a different Diagram for every
> option they have. thus using the same use case in different diagrams.
> example:
> (Package Actor 1)
> Actor1 - Use Case 1
> Actor1 - Use Case 2
> Actor1 - Use Case 3
> (Package Actor 2)
> Actor2 - Use Case 1
> Actor2 - Use Case 2
> Actor2 - Use Case 3
>
> Regards,
> Rick
>
>
> **************************************************************
> **********
> * 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
*
*************************************************************************
