Few questions on part-II diagrams

[srees Nivas]

Hi Gurus,

I'm working on Part-II, I've got few questions for you. I really appreciate your few minutes on this.

1) Do we need to show classes like Business Delegates, Session Facades etc. in class diagram? or simplify class diagram with only business components with Controllers/Managers etc?

2) As per usecase specification in the assignment, there is a Basic Flow. Do we need to assume alternate flows and show them in diagrams(say sequence diagrams) ?

3) Can we split the sequence diagrams if it is becoming larger?

4) Do we need to show authentication process for each usecase in sequence diagrams? Instead write a separate usecase for authentication and put a note/comment in each usecase sequence diagram?

Really appreciate your response. Any links/info also will be helpful.

Thanks,
Sri.

[Prabu S Arumugam]

I am also working on Part 2.. So don't take my replies for granted.. coz I haven't passed it yet

Class diagrams should look technology independant. Looking at the Class diagram, a developer can implement it in C++, Java or PHP.
So I don't think that Class diagrams are good place holders for J2EE design patterns.

For the other questions you have posted.. am eager to know the suggestions from forum members..
I'll keep watching this space I guess..

Good luck !

[srees Nivas]

Hi Prabu,,

I found answer to my question# 3. i.e.

3) Can we split the sequence diagrams if it is becoming larger?

Answer from SCEA5 certified :

" I made just one sequence diagram for each use case. Some of the use case may be little complicated to explain within a single page. Better to split the sequence diagram in this case so that it is not cluttered and complete the whole sequence. "

Here is the link, which will give more tips/useful info on Part-II deliverables.

http://www.itags.org/java/25329/

Let's wait for other questions to be answered from Gurus, mean while we can dig more sites. What do you say?

Best Regards,
Sri.

[Anand Ramesh]

1) You can specify.
2) You can decide that yourself;If you think it is work mentioning. I did not do that.
3) Refer "Support of Gates in Sequence diagrams" under http://tiny.cc/bmm9y
4) same as point 3

[srees Nivas]

Anand Ramesh wrote:1) You can specify.
2) You can decide that yourself;If you think it is work mentioning. I did not do that.
3) Refer "Support of Gates in Sequence diagrams" under http://tiny.cc/bmm9y
4) same as point 3

Thank you Anand, Your answers are really helpful.

Best Regards,
Sri.

[Bigwood Liu]

I am on my way to part 2 too.

1) Do we need to show classes like Business Delegates, Session Facades etc. in class diagram? or simplify class diagram with only business components with Controllers/Managers etc?

-Why not? JEE pattens apply not only to JEE technology, in addition, this is SCEA.

2) As per usecase specification in the assignment, there is a Basic Flow. Do we need to assume alternate flows and show them in diagrams(say sequence diagrams) ?

-If so it will be helpful, at least I think it won't make you lost point.

3) Can we split the sequence diagrams if it is becoming larger?

-I suppose so

4) Do we need to show authentication process for each usecase in sequence diagrams? Instead write a separate usecase for authentication and put a note/comment in each usecase sequence diagram?

-Authentication should be transparent in an application, a centralized authentication deserve a centralized diagram instead of scattered one.

[srees Nivas]

Hi

Thanks for your suggestions, here are my thoughts on first question,

-------------------------
1) Do we need to show classes like Business Delegates, Session Facades etc. in class diagram? or simplify class diagram with only business components with Controllers/Managers etc?

-Why not? JEE pattens apply not only to JEE technology, in addition, this is SCEA.
-------------------------

If we show all the domain classes and design pattern classes in the class diagram, then it is becoming very big in size.
I also read some where that it is just an extension of Domain Model.

Point#2, I read in forums that it is a best practice not to split the diagram and at the same time it should look as simple as possible. But it is almost impossible to satisfy both.

Point # 3 is if we show all the design pattern classes, then component diagram and class diagram looks almost same except the details like methods, attirbutes. Also in the assignment deliverables, it is clearly mentioned to show design pattern related classes in component diagram.

Best Regards,
Sri.

[Bigwood Liu]

That is right, the class diagram will be more complicated.

First I need to be clarified that whether there must be one class diagram, do multi-class diagrams will lost score? Anyway, in my opinion, any UML diagram including class diagram is used to express the design clearly and easy to be understood. If one diagram is not enough, draw that into 2 or more diagrams.

I did notice that the spec for component diagram mentioned Design pattern implementation, trying to figure out how the component diagram is going to show the detailed design pattern implementation, after all, component diagram should describe something that is in a level higher than class diagram.

Let's work together on it, and see how others think.

[Bigwood Liu]

I still think class diagram should include the patterns etc. classes