Part 2: Component Diagram

[Antonio Fornie]

Hello.

In Epractize Labs mojos I've seen a couple of weird things, I'd like to share with you:

1º In the Component Diagram they have 1 component for each class or jsp page... Would you do the same? I think this is wrong: We should have one or more classes or one or more jsp pages in each one, otherwise, Component Diagram would be like Class Diagram. For example, if I have three related Backing Beans, I would create ONLY ONE component with the three of them, wouldn't you?

2º Both in the Component Diagram and in the Class Diagram they include the Faces Servlet... I think if we use JEE5 framework, we don't have to include it completely in our diagrams, but just OUR components. So I would include my jsp's and Backing Beansm but neves the Faces Servlet, would you?

Thank you once again.

antonio

[Dinesh Kumaar]

Hi Antonio
I would suggest you to go through the examples in Chapter 9 in Marc Cade's Book.

You can go through these links.
https://coderanch.com/t/426825/java-Architect-SCEA/certification/modeling-JSF-managed-beans-component
https://coderanch.com/t/517797/java-Architect-SCEA/certification/JSF-compliant-diagram-component-diragam

1. You are right
2. From what I read from old post Sun wants to keep class diagram framework agnostic, so just use controller in class diagram.
In Component diagram, you can use jsp/jsf, managed bean ..etc.

My doubt regarding component diagram is in Mark cade's book, he has given comma separted values of jsp names. If I have to include managed bean name
in the component, should that also be similarly comma separted along with jsp names.

Do we need to specify notes justifying use of each technology in component diagram or this has to be given in our assumption document.

Thanks
Dinesh

[Jeanne Boyarsky]

Dinesh,
I've started a wiki page for counter-intutiive things in the Cade/Sheill sample. Listing the JSP names is definitely one of them so I added that.

In my submission, I did list the JSP names since I thought they wanted it (per Cade/Sheil). I only had 4 managed beans so I made each a component. I had assumptions in the beginning and with each diagram. So I put them in both.

[Dinesh Kumaar]

Thank you. Wiki page will help people interpret the solution in the book.

I am worried about how much documentation to provide in the UML diagrams. Chapter 9 solutions hardly have any documentation.
In real life, sequence diagrams use to have lot of hints for implementation to developers. Can you please suggest what kind of documentation is required in uml diagrams.

[Jeanne Boyarsky]

I included assumptions/documentation as text in my diagrams. I didn't put UML implementation notes in my sequence diagram though.

[Antonio Fornie]

Hello.

First of all, thanks to all of you.

Dinesh Kumaar wrote:Hi Antonio
I would suggest you to go through the examples in Chapter 9 in Marc Cade's Book.

You can go through these links.
https://coderanch.com/t/426825/java-Architect-SCEA/certification/modeling-JSF-managed-beans-component
https://coderanch.com/t/517797/java-Architect-SCEA/certification/JSF-compliant-diagram-component-diragam

1. You are right
2. From what I read from old post Sun wants to keep class diagram framework agnostic, so just use controller in class diagram.
In Component diagram, you can use jsp/jsf, managed bean ..etc.

I have 4 Backing/Managed Beans, but each one comes for different matter. For example: CustomerMB, SaleMB, ProductMB, InvoiceMB. In this case, would you place them four in the same component or would you create a component for each one?

Let's say I've got this 4 BackingBeans and their EJBs: CustomerBean, SaleBean, ProductBean and InvoiceBean. My first idea was to have two components, one for each tier: the four BackingBeans in a "web" component and the four EJBs in a "business" component. Do you think that's right or I should spread them among different components.

By the way, do I have to say the package name of each class?

Thank you very much.

antonio

[Jeanne Boyarsky]

Either approach is valid. And no, you don't have to show the package names.

[Dinesh Kumaar]

It would be very helpful if some one who has passed the exam, could clear my doubts in component diagram.

1. I noticed in chapter 9 examples, jsp names like remove in which is not present in the use case was included in multiple components.
Does it mean that we need to include jsp for existing component which is not part of SUD. for my assignment there are no requirement for create or delete,
so I am wondering whether those jsp also needs to be covered in component diagram.

2. I am trying to imagine how the component in presentation tier will look after including Managed bean name.
Below is modified Component content based on book example, Doesn't it look awkward, with the name saying Bid JSPs and it contains list of jsp and Mbean name.
Should jsp and managed bean present inside a single component or both has to be shown as separate component where jsp component is dependent on Managed bean component.

Can someone please confirm whether this way of representation is ok for component diagram.

Bid JSPs
JSPs: (create, search, search results, remove)
Managed Bean : BidMB

or

Bid JSPs
(create, search, search results, remove and BidMB)

Thanks for your time.

[Krzysztof Koziol]

Hi Dinesh,

Which approach did you choose?

[Dinesh Kumaar]

I used below format:

Bid JSPs

(create, search, search results, remove)

Managed Bean : BidMB

[Antoni Mysliborski]

Is it necessary to list all classes that component consists of, or can we use slightly higher level approach (in example above I would like to write "Bid View (create, search, search results, remove)" without specifying exact classes).

In Cade's example he uses such approach in business logic tier.

[Dinesh Kumaar]

I think it should be fine.