Rose also does not allow stereotypes on association ends, even though:
o UML defines four standard stereotypes for association ends
- association (default)
- global
- local
- parameter
o Rose *does* allow three of those four designations:
- *as property settings*, not as stereotypes
- *on link ends*, but not on association ends
- well, all four actually, if you consider the "field" setting to be
the
same as the «association» stereotype (not much of a stretch since
they
mean pretty much the same thing)
Note: a link end is an instance of a association end.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian G. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 1:02 PM
To: Eric D. Tarkington; ROSE_FORUM
Subject: RE: (ROSE) <<stereotype>> in Sequence Diagrams?
hiho,
In the UML 1.3 metamodel, Object is a subclass of Instance which is a
subclass of ModelElement. Every ModelElement can have a Stereotype. (See
figures 2-16 and 2-10 in the UML 1.3 [and even UML 1.4 draft] Specification
for each of these facts)
So yes it is valid. I think it would be a reasonable rule of thumb for you
to have Objects that use the same stereotypes as their specific Classes and
even make sure these stay in synch, but that is not part of the UML
definition. An object has its own stereotype that need not be the
stereotype of the class. Maybe I'll use <<entity>> for one of my classes,
but when I see a bunch of objects that are instances of the same <<entity>>
class laid out on a diagram I'd like to see that some of them were
<<ClientCreated>> and some of them were <<ServerLoaded>> or some other
classification that makes sense to me in that context.
Another issue on sequence diagrams is that Rose does not allow stereotypes
on messages. These were used in the UML User Guide for <<create>> and
<<destroy>> messages.
------ b
--
Brian G. Lyons
Number Six Software - Voted Rational's Best Complementary Service Provider
1655 North Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1100
Arlington, VA 22209-3196
http://www.numbersix.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Eric D. Tarkington
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 11:53 AM
To: ROSE_FORUM
Subject: (ROSE) <<stereotype>> in Sequence Diagrams?
My students asked me recently how to put a steretype onto an object in a
sequence diagram. Rose 98 won't do it, and I wonder why (Rational is
supposedly updating us to 2001, but the paperwork is taking forever).
It's amazing how long your habits can go unchallenged. I had simply
never tried to apply a stereotype in a sequence diagram, but my
students' request seems entirely reasonable.
Can't the object inherit the stereotype from the class? Is there
actually no nice way to display this in an interaction diagram? Does
this violate the UML spec. somehow?
-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
*
*************************************************************************
