I am showing only the domain classes or the class that makes some business sense, in my class diagram. I was planning to show all the servlets, Business objects, patterns, etc, in my sequence diagram.
The objects in my sequence diagram don't correspond to a class in my class diagram. Will this be a problem? Do I need to keep my sequence diagrams at a very high level and then show the patterns/business objects in the component diagram? I don't particularly like the idea of showing interactions between tiers and patterns, in the Component diagrams.... How did you folks deal with this?
Any pointers please?
Originally posted by Sridhar Raman001:
The objects in my sequence diagram don't correspond to a class in my class diagram. Will this be a problem? Sridhar
Hello, I hope this feedback will still be useful at this late date...
Although I cannot speak from experience with the SCEA Part 2 (which
I am working on now), here is my point of view based on my
years of experience with UML and formal education on it.
First, all objects on sequence diagrams must have corresponding classes in your class diagram(s). In J2EE related publications, however, the object
called "Client" is often used without a matching class, rather than the
typical "User" classifier. This might be an indication that a general "Client" would be acceptable for purposes of the SCEA part2.
Next, all messages (horizontal arrows) must be named or labeled with the
name of an operation that has been defined for the receiving class object in
the class diagram for that class. For purposes of architecture-level sequence diagrams, arguments and return types are usually omitted, but are allowed for clarity if you see fit. As people have mentioned here, the point is to make sure the examiner understands your intent and that you know what you're doing.
Finally, Notes are important to the clarity of the sequence diagram.
In the case of a "conceptual" Client object, the Client on one sequence diagram could represent a particular Object on some other, perhaps higher-level, sequence diagram.
I would appreciate any differing views from people that have passed the SCEA
Part 2 and 3.
also the sequence and collaboration diagram from the use cases?
what about the component diagrams? do we need to derive a package diagram first then derive the component diagram from the package diagram?
Originally posted by Billy Tsai:
class diagram from Business domain...?
sequence and collaboration diagram from use cases?
component diagrams...derive a package diagram first ...?
The general principles regarding the nature of these diagrams...
1. class diagrams may have a lot more business entities
than the business domain model, and might omit or reorganize
the information differently.
2. sequence and collaboration diagrams are interchangeable (i.e.
they can be automatically converted from one to the other and
back without loss of information). They are interaction diagrams.
Consequently, only one or the other is usually needed, and unless
your assignment specifically asked for both, dont bother.
3. component and package diagrams: its up to you how to go about
developing these. I happen to like to sketch out a preliminary
deployment diagram before component or package: it helps to
keep in mind the protocols, server hosts, legacy, and platform
capabilities that affect my choice of software technologies
for each of the components to be created.
Hope that helps.