>Using "Time" instead of "System Clock" as an actor is an interesting
>idea -- sort of an Ingmar Bergman thing. The "grim reaper" has already
>been used for death, but "father time" is very similar -- do you think
>it would be suitable as an icon?
I would suggest an icon of Marvin the paranoid andrioid who time-travelled
sufficiently to be a whole lot older than the universe. (his favourite
saying was: "time, don't talk to me about time")
I think Marvin has a point ;) I don't think a "system" actor is good. If you
can't get that use case expressed associated to maintenance people,
auditors, bookkeepers, insurance company reps, QA people, police, tax
authorities, customs authorities, journalists or lawyers, you're probably
not doing it right. Focussing on the "timing" aspect of the functionality
simply means you're losing focus on who you're doing this *for*. Use cases
are one aspect of the decriptive process, timers belong on another level.
I certainly agree that one shouldn't be to orthodox when interpreting
"standard" textbooks on use cases. But, to me, involving implementation
issues in use case modelling feels similar to putting UI logic in business
objects; the conceptual layering is well established, breaking it causes
sufficient disturbances in the "pattern" of the layering to cause more harm
than good - no matter how good the justification seemed to be at the time...
Kristian
************************************************************************
* 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
*
*************************************************************************
