Hi, I am showing only the domain classes or the class that makes some business sense, in my class diagram. I was planning to show all the servlets, Business objects, patterns, etc, in my sequence diagram. The objects in my sequence diagram don't correspond to a class in my class diagram. Will this be a problem? Do I need to keep my sequence diagrams at a very high level and then show the patterns/business objects in the component diagram? I don't particularly like the idea of showing interactions between tiers and patterns, in the Component diagrams.... How did you folks deal with this? Any pointers please? thanks Sridhar
Originally posted by Sridhar Raman001: The objects in my sequence diagram don't correspond to a class in my class diagram. Will this be a problem? Sridhar
Hello, I hope this feedback will still be useful at this late date... Although I cannot speak from experience with the SCEA Part 2 (which I am working on now), here is my point of view based on my years of experience with UML and formal education on it. First, all objects on sequence diagrams must have corresponding classes in your class diagram(s). In J2EE related publications, however, the object called "Client" is often used without a matching class, rather than the typical "User" classifier. This might be an indication that a general "Client" would be acceptable for purposes of the SCEA part2. Next, all messages (horizontal arrows) must be named or labeled with the name of an operation that has been defined for the receiving class object in the class diagram for that class. For purposes of architecture-level sequence diagrams, arguments and return types are usually omitted, but are allowed for clarity if you see fit. As people have mentioned here, the point is to make sure the examiner understands your intent and that you know what you're doing. Finally, Notes are important to the clarity of the sequence diagram. In the case of a "conceptual" Client object, the Client on one sequence diagram could represent a particular Object on some other, perhaps higher-level, sequence diagram. I would appreciate any differing views from people that have passed the SCEA Part 2 and 3.
Juan Rolando Prieur-Reza, M.S., LSSBB, SCEA, SCBCD, SCWCD, SCJP/1.6, IBM OOAD, SCSA
can I assume that we derive the class diagram from the Business domain model, the descriptioni about the company and the interview? also the sequence and collaboration diagram from the use cases? what about the component diagrams? do we need to derive a package diagram first then derive the component diagram from the package diagram?
Juan Rolando Prieur-Reza
Joined: Jun 20, 2003
Originally posted by Billy Tsai: class diagram from Business domain...? sequence and collaboration diagram from use cases? component diagrams...derive a package diagram first ...?
Hi, The general principles regarding the nature of these diagrams... 1. class diagrams may have a lot more business entities than the business domain model, and might omit or reorganize the information differently. 2. sequence and collaboration diagrams are interchangeable (i.e. they can be automatically converted from one to the other and back without loss of information). They are interaction diagrams. Consequently, only one or the other is usually needed, and unless your assignment specifically asked for both, dont bother. 3. component and package diagrams: its up to you how to go about developing these. I happen to like to sketch out a preliminary deployment diagram before component or package: it helps to keep in mind the protocols, server hosts, legacy, and platform capabilities that affect my choice of software technologies for each of the components to be created. Hope that helps.
Joined: May 23, 2003
Hi do we have to draw boundry, control and entity classes for the class diagram of the part2 assignment?