• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Ron McLeod
  • Paul Clapham
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • paul wheaton
  • Rob Spoor
  • Devaka Cooray
Saloon Keepers:
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Moores
Bartenders:
  • Mikalai Zaikin

Question from IBM 486 Test

 
Greenhorn
Posts: 5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Which of the following are true about interpreting class diagrams from different perspectives?

a)
Specification perspective class diagrams are developed without considering the programming language that might be used to
implement it.
b)
The conceptual perspective class diagram of an application would not include all the classes required and their details, rather, they would only identify domain classes.
c)
In the conceptual perspective, associations represent relationships between classes, where as they represent responsibilities in the specification perspective.
d)
Operations (the processes that a class knows to carry out) should be used in conceptual models to specify the interface of a class.
I think a & b are correct answer, What do you guys think?
Naichen
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 185
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Here is what I think:
true a) Specification perspective stresses interface of the software not implementation so there should be no language specific solutions or rather they should be "meaningless". What I mean is mechanism like multiple inheritance, interfaces, (or of minor weight) properties are not present in all of the OOL and we have to remember that the model doesn't have to be implemented in OOL it can be for example C. I am not sure if that is rite, I could not find anything in the literature to prove my point.
true b) "..., a conceptual model should be drown with little or no regard for the software ..."* the purpose for the conceptual perspective is to understand the domain, so introducing too many details is rather confusing, and will make communicating with the domain expert difficult (I believe that after use cases this perspective is most useful tool to communicate with the domain experts).
true c) as specification perspective focuses on the interface and the relations between classes represented in the conceptual view take shape as a responsibilities for updating the relationship.
false d) conceptual model is not indented to present clause's interface.
*"UML Distilled ...:M. Flowler"
[This message has been edited by Michal Harezlak (edited September 11, 2000).]
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic