Hi, UML gives you more the following basic relationships between classes: Name...........Ownershiptype ---------------------------- association....Both dependancy.....Client inheritance....Client realize........Client Ownership type means who can control the relation: - Both means that 'client' & 'server' can see the relation (so they are involved in the definition of the assoc) - Client means that the 'server' has no clue that the client has access to/views it. Rose stores only associations in packages. So, only for associations you need to define an owner (The other relationship types are owned by the client-owner). In addition, an association in Rose serves as element to store other UML relationships (e.g. aggregation, composition, etc...). And the concept of navigability that comes with all UML relationships is IMHO one of the most important additions to modeling activities. But, for the UML-beginner, these relationships are usually quite complex in themselves. (I usually set up a list of relationships that the project starts with. Excluded relationship types will be introduced one-by-one according to the project's phases & focus). For me too, it seemed stupid in the first encounter, how Rose stores associations. But if you consider that ownership forces consideration that again forces thinking (!) it became one my favourite features:-): - people need to think about associations (well, 'Non-UML-developers' think about attributes) - associations reflect communication (between the classes). Owned associations force communication (in the project). Best regards, Volker -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Huseyin Angay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Gesendet: Sonntag, 16. September 2001 12:10 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: RE: (ROSE) Where to put the associations? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tapio Taipale > Sent: 12 September 2001 05:07 > To: Kennedy, Patrick; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: (ROSE) Where to put the associations? > > > > Hi, > > This was an excellent reply that helped me a lot. > > I'm still curious why the associations have to be owned by > packages. It > seems to be a feature of Rose and not a very nice one. You know, I actually like that feature. Back in the Rose version 3 days, I used to think that was completely stupid. A couple of projects later, I was getting used to it. Nowadays, I wouldn't have it any other way. You see, associations have such a far-ranging effect in your model that you really don't want to mess with them too much. When you associate two classes in the same package, you check the package out and alter the association in any way you want. The package is self-contained, so there is no problem. What about associations shared between packages? Someone checks out his own package and alters an association that affects a class in a package for which you are responsible, without asking you. Wouldn't you be just a little upset? This way, you always know if altering an association's nature will affect anybody else. (But, it is efective only half the time, unfortunately. If the association is in your package, you can still upset the other guy without thinking. Brian Lyons' suggestion is one better.) > > Wouldn't it be much easier (for users, at least) that classes > owns their > associations? In case of bi-directional association both > classes would own a > copy of the association (isn't that the case also in > implementation in any > OO language). When two package owners edit the same association, whose alteration is the correct one? Regards, Huseyin Angay Karabash Ltd. www.karabash.co.uk > For read-only units one-way associations would > be no problem > but I guess bi-directional associations might have some > problems if other > unit is read-only. > > -Tapio > > *************************************************************** > Tapio Taipale e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > NetHawk Solutions phone +358 (0)403 010 389 > Elektroniikkatie 2 fax +358 (0)403 010 301 > P.O. Box 100, 90501 Oulu, Finland > *************************************************************** > > > -----Original Message----- > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kennedy, Patrick > > Sent: 11. syyskuuta 2001 20:44 > > Subject: RE: (ROSE) Where to put the associations? > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > relocating associations: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ... > > > ************************************************************** > ********** > * 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/support/usergroups/rose/rose_forum.jsp * Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To unsubscribe from the list, please send email * * To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Subject:<BLANK> * Body: unsubscribe rose_forum * ************************************************************************* --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.274 / Virus Database: 144 - Release Date: 23/08/2001 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.274 / Virus Database: 144 - Release Date: 23/08/2001 ************************************************************************ * 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/support/usergroups/rose/rose_forum.jsp * 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/support/usergroups/rose/rose_forum.jsp * Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To unsubscribe from the list, please send email * * To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Subject:<BLANK> * Body: unsubscribe rose_forum * *************************************************************************
