In the component diagram requirement of part 2 we are asked to indicate J2EE specific technologies in use. However, as far as I can see the Sun EJB/UML mapping specification doesn't really offer a lot of support for component diagrams. The EJB sterotypes are applied to subsytems, which would mean that there could be a large number of subsytems in the component diagram. Any advice or examples of how the component diagram should look in order to be UML compliant and indicate J2EE technologies would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I'm not familiar with any UML specification from Sun, but as far as I know, there are stereotypes for Java and J2EE components, such as web archive files, EJB archive files, and so on. Maybe unrelated, but successful candidates in the past (look at the older posts here) have indicated that they have had good luck when supplementing their component diagrams with elements of deployment diagrams. Have fun!
In the class diagram, we have so many classes such as EJB Home/remote/Bean, value objects, control classes. How do we simplify our class diagram? I mean is there any guidelines that we should follow? Qiang
Joined: Jan 26, 2002
This has been discussed before, but it generally seems to have been agreed that things like EJB internals, the Java application, etc., are implementation details that are outside the scope of the Architect, and are assumed to be left to the Component Providers. Can't really elaborate more right now - I'm taking the OCA I exam RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT!
Joined: Jan 14, 2002
How about DAO? Do we need to put DAO in Class diagram? If we can use CMP, we might have less classes. But I feel that sun wants you to use DAO. Maybe I am wrong.
I’ve looked at a lot of different solutions, and in my humble opinion Aspose is the way to go. Here’s the link: http://aspose.com