jQuery in Action, 3rd edition
The moose likes OO, Patterns, UML and Refactoring and the fly likes Composite relationship and 0..1 multiplicity Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Engineering » OO, Patterns, UML and Refactoring
Bookmark "Composite relationship and 0..1 multiplicity" Watch "Composite relationship and 0..1 multiplicity" New topic

Composite relationship and 0..1 multiplicity

Piotr Rzexniczak

Joined: Jan 26, 2011
Posts: 4

Can somebody explain me how the composite relationship and the 0..1 multiplicity can coexist together? Let's see at the attachment: EncapsulatedClassifier - Port relationship (from UML 2.1 spec):

  • EncapsulatedClassifier is a structured classifier
  • Port is a Property
  • Property is a part of StructuredClassifier
  • It means to me that Port can not exist without a EncapsulatedClassifier as its part

  • So - What the 0 in 0..1 multiplicity means? In my current understanding of this only 1 multiplicity would be correct...

    [Thumbnail for uml_cpomposite_01.png]

    Ove Lindström
    Ranch Hand

    Joined: Mar 10, 2008
    Posts: 326

    I agree with you that is looks a bit strange.

    The only explanation I can come up with is if we have all the Ports in a pool so that we can define all ports but not assign them to an EncapsulatedClassifyer. But it still looks strange.
    I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
    subject: Composite relationship and 0..1 multiplicity
    It's not a secret anymore!