My take, no more no less (I don't believe that there are any correct answers). > > I’ve two questions about actors. > > 1. Must we have only one actor initiating the UC? If I have two > actors initiating the UC, like “kiosk customer” and “schedule > administrator” that initializes the same UC, “View game schedule” > (the flow does not change for both), must I generate a more abstract > parent actor?
Yes, you should (not must, but should) generate a more abstract actor. The reason being is that if the role of the perosn initiating the use case changes in some way only one actor needs to change. (Information in ONE place.) > 2. May I have an actor that does not interact with an UC? For > example, I have two actors, CIC and PV, these actors have a parent > actor called “CA”. If the actor “CA” does not interact with an UC, is > this a valid actor? And if only the actor “CA” interact with an UC, > are “CIC” and “PV” valid actors? > Don't know why you would want to create a parent that has no use case interaction. I think that Q1 answers Q2. If you create a parent for two actors initiating a use case, those two actors still initiate the use case, it's just that it's possible that they may not appear on a use case diagram. Les. ________________________________________________ Get your own "800" number Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag ************************************************************************ * 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 *************************************************************************
