Hi Ara, I'm sorry but I do not support the reverse direction, so I have to insist on:
Uml -> java (+xml) -> db And: because there is also hand-written java that is not generated from UML, the bottom line becomes: 1.: db -> UML -> Java (+xml) 2. to n.: UML, Java (+xml) -> Java (+xml), db The algorithm is converging, isn't it? :-) Cheers Matthias > -----Original Message----- > From: Ara abrahamian [mailto:ara.ebrahimi@;lerox.at] > Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 8:41 AM > To: 'Matthias Bohlen'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-devel] FW: [Middlegen-user] RE: db<->code<->uml? > > > > As I explained with my example "courtroom story" a few days > ago, there > is > > much more to come when you introduce real model driven architecture > > concepts. On the other hand, UML cannot represent > executable business > > logic. > > So this is what I suggest: > > > > 1.: db -> UML -> Java > > 2. to n.: UML, Java -> Java, db > > > > Thoughts? > > Well, you can of course generate classes which have @tags from some > stereotypes of the uml model. You're doing it right now, you're > generating some classes from uml model which have > @ejb.bean/etc tags. So > you generate the mapping @tags from uml then the @tags are used for > generating the db schema. If a @tag is not appropriate then > you generate > an xml file where you define the mapping there, like the deployment > descriptor approach. So: > Uml <-> java (+xml) <-> db > > Ara. > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: ApacheCon, November 18-21 in Las Vegas (supported by COMDEX), the only Apache event to be fully supported by the ASF. http://www.apachecon.com _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
