Part 2 - Transfer Objects (or Value Objects) in Component Diagrams??

[Eduardo Rodrigues]

Hi guys!

I was studying the Cade's Study Guide and I noted that the Value Objects in the component diagrams weren't represented...
My question is: Can I ignore the TO's or VO's in this diagrams???
The dependency from others components will clutter the diagram...

Think about:

-The JSP's will need the TO's to view
-The Servlet's Controller will need the TO's to pass from JSP to EJB's tier...
-The Session EJB's will need the TO's to receive and pass arguments to the DAO's and to pass the TO's to the WEB tier...

Many dependency lines crossing the diagram...

Please, comments???

Thank you so much!

[Peter Storch]

Hi,

I don't think it's usefull to model the dependencies to the TOs. As you said it clutters the diagrams and make them less readable and understandable.

But you can show e.g. in one Sequence Diagram the flow through your layers: the Servlet calls the Business Delegate and that calls the Session EJB and DAO ... and the arguments as well as the return values are always TOs.

[Ip Patrick]

Hi,

There is no definite answer because too few resources talk about component diagrams. For me, I choose to model only deployable components like EJBs, jsps ... Transfer objects alone usually will not be completing a major workflow and will not be working as a component on its own.

Hope it helps.

Patrick

[Ramon Gill]

Cade's component diagrams in his case study do not include TO's (or VO's -whatever you want to call them).

Ray