This week's book giveaway is in the OCAJP forum. We're giving away four copies of OCA Java SE 8 Programmer I Study Guide 1Z0-808 and have Jeanne Boyarsky & Scott Selikoff on-line! See this thread for details.
Here is what it asks in deliverables section of the assignment: "Create a Component diagram that shows all of the J2EE components used in the system and their interaction. For example, what EJBs, Servlets, and/or JSPs might be needed? " I personally do not believe that it is good idea to show each JSP, Session and Entity Beans in a component diagram. I am wondering what you guys think? Did you guys create a component diagram that shows all JSPs and EJBs etc? Thanks.
nope, maybe just a front controller, following Cade's design. Because I have 2 different clients, and only one has JSPs, i'm still thinking of not showing anything at all (just a generic "Client"), or maybe using a "VIEW" stereotype - that would depict both JSPs and some Swing panels, what do u think? Rudi
Joined: Jun 04, 2003
I totall agree with you, this is what makes sense... In fact, I created a component diagram similar to what you said with major players such as view and front controller. However, I am worried that what they ask in assignment is not what we think (and what makes sense!)... If they ask one simple class diagram without all EJBs and JSPs involved, and one component diagram with all JSPs and EJBs, there is something wrong either the way I am experiencing J2EE, or something wrong in the wording of the assignment. I am afraid, if we come up with a component diagram that we described, they might reject it at all which is 44 points which means failure...
I think you are missing the point of a component diagram. It is supposed to show the developers how the parts of your system interact. If you don't show the jsp's then how would a developer that the uml gets sent to know how to construct the application?
Joined: Jun 04, 2003
I would think that showing each JSP or EJBs would make more sense in detailed class diagrams. And you have more options in terms of showing relationships in class diagram than component diagram.
I agree with Scott, the component diagram should at the minimum indicate the component technologies used to realize the design. As for JSP stereotype in a class diagram, that will be way out. You could have a "view" stereotype instead to decribe your jsp component classes. Louis.
Originally posted by Ahmet Emre: I would think that showing each JSP or EJBs would make more sense in detailed class diagrams. And you have more options in terms of showing relationships in class diagram than component diagram.