Glenn (and all):
Here are some thoughts I had after thinking about your message below. Right... That's often the question, isn't it-- which models will we update and which ones will be static/stepping-stones? This is sometimes a bit of a trade-off because keeping things up-to-date can take more time than it is worth. At times. Unless. Unless there is a way to link the implementation and the model. For example, I love Class Diagrams because I can tie them directly to my code. This works just great. Similarly with DB modeling tools, like Visio and ERWin. I can round-trip engineer from either end. Nice. Things are different with some of the other models, in particular Activity Diagrams and Sequence Diagrams, which I also love. Despite my fondness for such abstract representations of the system, I have to look at the ROI in keeping them in sync with the implementation. Please note that I have not used Rose for a few years; I finally got a project where they were willing to make the investment and I say "yea!". However, in Rose, it still seems that there is no way to tie an Activity diagram to code so that round-trip synchronization is possible. Is this so? My guess is that the Activity diagram is abstracted too far from implementation to do this meaningfully. The states are not discretely represented, in most cases. Even given to a pure OO language, there are few handles by which this could be done. That's my guess. (So too with Sequence Diagrams, I expect.) Furthermore, I know that the impetus behind UML suggests the abstract ought NOT be directly tied to implementation-specific details. This I agree with, in theory... but... I still MUST build the system in the real world with code. The model will not get me anywhere, so the 2 ARE related, at some level, necessarily. That's the quandary. I don't want to break the rules of UML and yet still I yearn for the impossible-- to tie my abstract workflow Activity Diagram to my code base. Even a manual one-way push would be great to get snapshots of what is going on. (Rest assured-- I am hoping some Rose guru will put me in my place here and tell me about the ability to round-trip engineer an Activity Diagram in a meaningful and straight-forward way. I'd accept that information humbly and with a smile.) It sounds like your workflow application allowed them to adjust some kind of "Virtual Activity Diagram" in real-time, thus allowing the diagram to me updated by the end-users and, as such, remain synchronized with what the system will actually do. This is a great idea. Really it is. Many times I wish Rose were more approachable in terms of usability to allow such a thing. One could publish an editable model to a user community in a web-based application which allows users to make simple changes to a diagram (with a reduced toolset) and then the designer can accept the changes as desired and merge them into the full-blown Rose model. Someday, perhaps. However, my question wrt such a system would be: How does such an application tie to the code-base at the implementation level? That is, the end-users have made their input and we have a more accurate and complete model of the workflow. This is great, quite useful, and a step in the right direction. However, this is still divorced from the concrete system itself and thus subject to the whims of the coder. For example, the model may say X but (for whatever reason) the coder may have built Y. How can THIS disconnect be mitigated? (I hope Rational and the UML-designers are working on this because I haven't a good idea. Yet.) --Mark Kamoski. -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Molano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 16:44 To: 'Mark Kamoski' Subject: RE: (ROSE) is UML suitable for model workflow? Mark, Yes, our team created several business process models with Rose. They used activity diagrams to do it. However let me tell you this: Our project included the development of a workflow application to allow final users to control those process in real time. So the final process models were created with the WF application and we realize that many details weren�t modeled in the activity diagrams, Instead they were included like comments. There�s a lot of diference if you want to create just static models or to create dinamic models which allows control in real time. Regards, Glenn -----Mensaje original----- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]En nombre de Peter Smith Enviado el: Mi�rcoles, 03 de Abril de 2002 09:36 a.m. Para: 'Mark Kamoski'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: RE: (ROSE) is UML suitable for model workflow? Just another Rose feature that I have found very handy in cases where you have workflows that are fairly complex and require a large activity or sequence diagram. Use the "hyper-link diagrams" feature in Rose where you can drag and drop a diagram from the Browser on top of a note and then when you double click the note you can navigate to that diagram. Any diagram can be hyperlinked. This is especially useful if you want to "modularize" your diagrams into smaller, more manageable pieces. Also allows for reuse as you will undoubtedly run across common routines that are invoked from various points in your workflows. You can chase these links using SoDA to generate a complete document with all the diagrams and any supporting text. Keep in mind that you can attach files to diagrams as well to contain further documentation. You could also Web Publish the model and all the diagrams, hyperlinks, and supporting doc will go along with the model onto your website so you can have other folks view the model without requiring Rose! Very, very useful way to disseminate your model. Regards, Pete -----Original Message----- From: Mark Kamoski [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: (ROSE) is UML suitable for model workflow? << File: ATT00000.txt; charset = gb2312 >> ************************************************************************ * Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions. * For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support * * Post or Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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 * * Post or Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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 *************************************************************************
