Hello Stephan, The model (In fact, maybe digging through the source?) made the picture clearer for me.
My small problem is that I have to do this model anyway: - the app is for my college degree - there is a company who sponsors the work Both resist on the UML model :-( I don't like it also, but it is a _must_. Thursday, October 27, 2005, 2:25:53 PM, you wrote: > On Thursday 27 October 2005 07:49, Adam Groszer wrote: >> I tried to keep it simple, but you're right I missed the work items. >> Now I updated the model also with the attributes and methods by using >> pyreverse. I hope it did not miss any. > The graph does not establish the link between an application and the work > items. In fact, it does not show the separation between workflow definition > and implementation at all. > Also, may I ask what this UML diagram does for you? I find this much harder to > read than the README.txt files. If I would not know how zope.wfmc the graph > would certainly not help me, because it still does not give any hint of what > is described by XPDL and what has to be Python coded. > Regards, > Stephan -- Best regards, Adam mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Quote of the day: Memory should be the starting point of the present. _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com