wood burning stoves 2.0*
The moose likes Architect Certification (SCEA/OCMJEA) and the fly likes component diagrams. Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


JavaRanch » Java Forums » Certification » Architect Certification (SCEA/OCMJEA)
Bookmark "component diagrams." Watch "component diagrams." New topic
Author

component diagrams.

tery valencia
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Posts: 47
hi guyz,

just a question about component diagrams. Do you deeply explain the concept of a MVC framework (Front controller + dispatcher + helpers(model) ) or can we just put a component tagged <<Servlet>> just as in Cade's book. I dont know till which level of explanations we re supposed to arrive.

i mean :

first solution is :

Jsp component ---> Servlet Component ---> Business delegate(with service locator) ---> Facade SLSB .....


second solution is :

Jsp component ---> Front controller (with request mapping, request processor, command pattern, dispatcher) ---> Business delegate (with service locator) ---> Facade SLSB ....

I m making a Customer Component Diagram and i m confused about the strategy to use.

any ideas ?

tery
Pham Huy Anh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Aug 23, 2006
Posts: 41
Hello,

Sorry to wake this old post up. I have somes almost similar concern.

1. My anwser is also my question:

I am planning to have only one component "Display View" with stereo "JSP" and other "RequestController" with stereo "Servlet". Not much like Mark Cade : "BrowseCatalogForm", "SearchCatalogForm" etc.

For the swing, the same thing : one "UserForm" with stereo "SwingGUI", one "Controller" component , one BD/SL.

Do you think is that OK?

2. By the way, extra question :
- The swing have login component instead of JAAS (JAAS is complicated for me).
- I dont use SFSB, session information will be store in HttpSession for web, in the controller at client side for the swing.

Is that Ok too?

Thanks in advance!
Ricardo Ferreira
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 13, 2006
Posts: 156
It will depend of what you're trying to do. For architecture pourposes, you should try to define a high level architecture, focusing at layers, dependencies, business components and subsystems. But for some implementation model, you could enter at those low level details about patterns and classes from MVC.

My tip: Keep the things simplier! Create something readable, but not overcluted.

Regards,

Originally posted by tery valencia:
hi guyz,

just a question about component diagrams. Do you deeply explain the concept of a MVC framework (Front controller + dispatcher + helpers(model) ) or can we just put a component tagged <<Servlet>> just as in Cade's book. I dont know till which level of explanations we re supposed to arrive.

i mean :

first solution is :

Jsp component ---> Servlet Component ---> Business delegate(with service locator) ---> Facade SLSB .....


second solution is :

Jsp component ---> Front controller (with request mapping, request processor, command pattern, dispatcher) ---> Business delegate (with service locator) ---> Facade SLSB ....

I m making a Customer Component Diagram and i m confused about the strategy to use.

any ideas ?

tery


Ricardo Ferreira,<br /> <br />Sun Certified Enterprise Architect<br />IBM Certified SOA Solution Designer<br />IBM Certified RUP v7.0 Solution Designer<br />IBM Certified Specialist for RUP v2003
 
GeeCON Prague 2014
 
subject: component diagrams.