I think Haydn has some good points here - I am sure you will get many other
comments about this.

regards

anthony

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 22 October 2001 13:44
> To: Manish Didwania
> Cc: Kesterton, Anthony; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ROSE_FORUM
> Subject: Re: (ROSE) Use Case-confusion
> 
> 
> 
> The naming of the use cases are crucial to the system.  In 
> the first email
> from you, a use case "Purchase Order" is given as an example. 
>  However is
> this "purchase an order" or an actual "purchase order"?  Rule 
> of thumb I
> use is that use cases should be "verb-noun" phrases.
> 
> In the example with "Maintain Purchase Orders", this is also 
> badly named in
> my opinion.  Words like "Manage", "Maintain" and other vague 
> terminology
> should really be avoided.  A better version would be:
> 
> 
> Purchase Administrator (Actor) ---->  Create Purchase Order (use case)
> 
> Two possible alternate paths that could be considered use 
> cases in their
> own rights could be:
> Update Purchase Order (use case) -- <<extends>> --> Create 
> Purchase Order
> Delete Purchase Order (use case) -- <<extends>> --> Create 
> Purchage Order
> 
> As for "Maintain GatePass" this (from your description) would 
> be best as 2
> use cases:
> 
> "Send Goods" and "Receive Goods".  Common sections to these 
> use cases may
> exist, like getting customer details, which could be pulled 
> out of both and
> placed in another use case which is included by both of these.
> 
> The main problem is definitely with the naming of the use 
> cases.  We had a
> use case called "Manage <<something>>", and off this were 
> many includes for
> all the possibilities including add, delete, update, etc.
> 
> Functional decomposition should be avoided at all costs.  There's a
> document in the www.rational.net site that talks about use cases and
> functional decomposition.  You may want to see this because 
> it certainly
> turned our project around and many use cases were stripped 
> and renamed and
> the whole use case diagram suddenly made sense.
> 
> Haydn
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                                                               
>                                   
>                     "Manish Didwania"                         
>                                   
>                     <mdidwania@amadeusi        To:     
> "Kesterton, Anthony"                     
>                     ndia.net>                  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "ROSE_FORUM"          
>                     Sent by:                   
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>                        
>                     owner-rose_forum@ra        cc:            
>                                   
>                     tional.com                 Subject:     
> Re: (ROSE) Use Case-confusion       
>                                                               
>                                   
>                                                               
>                                   
>                     22/10/2001 12:50                          
>                                   
>                     Please respond to                         
>                                   
>                     "Manish Didwania"                         
>                                   
>                                                               
>                                   
>                                                               
>                                   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> It is really helpful, but I still have few doubts as I am 
> novice to system
> designing. I have am designing a module to my existing 
> application First
> time I decided to do Design using Rational.
> I am adding a stock control/inventory module. What I have 
> done so far is
> that I have designed 5 user cases and 2 Actor.
> 
> Actor 1 (Purchase Admin)
> link to two user cases
>     Maintain Purchase Orders
>     Maintain Suppliers Data
> Actor 2 (Store Admin)
> link to three user cases
>     Maintain Goods Master
>     Maintain Gatepass (to basicly maintain documents for send 
> and receive
> goods)
>     Execute GatePass (which basicly updates the stock master)
> 
> And I have put all details like process for 
> updation,deletion, search etc
> in
> the documentation. I agree that one should not go in very 
> deep in Use Case.
> But the approach I have used is correct????
> 
> Pls advise.
> 
> Regards Manish
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kesterton, Anthony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Manish Didwania" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "ROSE_FORUM"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:03 PM
> Subject: RE: (ROSE) Use Case-confusion
> 
> 
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Different texts disagree about the level you should write 
> the use cases.
> > General practise here at Rational (guided by people like 
> Ivar Jacobson,
> our
> > colleagues from the old Objectory company, and Rational's general
> > experience) is that you should keep to the one use case for Purchase
> Order,
> > and not break it down into multiple use case as your other example
> suggests.
> > This all depends on the system you are trying to build of course :-)
> >
> > In general, you should have a small number of use cases for 
> an average
> level
> > of functionality system - say 10 use cases.  The system 
> with hundreds of
> use
> > cases is almost always the wrong level of detail.
> >
> > You want to capture a useful end-to-end process in a use case.
> >
> > You do not want use cases where they are one step in a 
> daisy-chain of use
> > cases - all of which need to happen before something useful happens.
> This
> > "form" of use cases is better known as functional 
> decomposition - and is
> not
> > the purpose of use cases at all.
> >
> > One simple rule-of-thumb (that not everyone agrees with - but really
> makes
> > you think about the level of your use cases) is that you 
> might expect a
> use
> > case to take a person-year to complete from idea to tested 
> code.  At this
> > point - the 200 usecase project start to panic until they 
> re-think their
> use
> > cases to the right level.
> >
> > Hope that helps a little.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > anthony
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Manish Didwania [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 22 October 2001 09:27
> > > To: ROSE_FORUM
> > > Subject: (ROSE) Use Case-confusion
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I just want to know what is the common practice. In terms 
> of putting
> > > Activity Diagram in Use Case.
> > > And at what level one should specify a Use Case. As I was
> > > reading a book on
> > > UML it was dividing a Purchase Order Use Case in 4-5 diff use
> > > case like
> > > Placing an Order, Cancellation of order and so on. And in 
> rational few
> > > examples that I had checked they define Use Case for purchase
> > > Order as one
> > > Use Case and then specify the activity in documentation.
> > >
> > > Thanks Manish
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > **************************************************************
> > > **********
> > > * 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
> > *
> > 
> **************************************************************
> ***********
> >
> 
> **************************************************************
> **********
> * 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
> *
> **************************************************************
> ***********
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Haydn Robinson, Software Engineer                         
> Sophos Anti-Virus
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]                      
> http://www.sophos.com
> US Support: +1 888 SOPHOS 9                     UK Support: 
> +44 1235 559933
> 
************************************************************************
* 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
*
*************************************************************************

Reply via email to