• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Showing DAO in Component DIagram

 
Bijan Mohanty
Ranch Hand
Posts: 36
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi guys,
While showing DAOs in my component diagram I was trying to follow Cade's notation of creating an interface and showing a dependency from the DAO to that interface. So far so good. Then I need to draw a subsystem(as per Cade's notation) and put a dependency from the interface to the subsystem. But my TogetherControl center doesn't allow me to draw a dependency from an "Interface" to a "susystem". Does anybody have seen this kinda behavior and what was the workaround ?
Also, dudes those who have used DAOs in their component diagrams and successfully passed partII and partIII, please share your thoughts on the notation of showing DAOs related to the database subsystems.
Thanks a bunch in advance.
Bijan
 
Nalla Senthilnathan
Ranch Hand
Posts: 40
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Bijan Mohanty:
Hi guys,
While showing DAOs in my component diagram I was trying to follow Cade's notation of creating an interface and showing a dependency from the DAO to that interface. So far so good. Then I need to draw a subsystem(as per Cade's notation) and put a dependency from the interface to the subsystem. But my TogetherControl center doesn't allow me to draw a dependency from an "Interface" to a "susystem". Does anybody have seen this kinda behavior and what was the workaround ?
Bijan

Within a component diagram workspace I was able to create a component which is a "subsystem" stereotype and was able to show a dependency to an interface (circle notation in togetherJ)
Nalla
 
Juan Rolando Prieur-Reza
Ranch Hand
Posts: 237
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by sh yh:

The original question is to show a dependency from an interface to a "subsystem".
[ August 27, 2003: Message edited by: sh yh ]

Hello,
Cade's Component Diagrams are wrong on this particular point.
A component (A) must be diagrammed with a "link" or "realization" line to one or more of its interfaces (circle); usually this is a solid line without an arrow. TogetherSoft supports these constructs correctly. You can't do what Cade did because its wrong.
Components (B) that use another component (A) are "dependant" on A's interface; they show a dashed line with an arrow pointing to the interface of (A). See page 157 The Unified Modeling Language User Guide, 1999 for example.
John
 
Juan Rolando Prieur-Reza
Ranch Hand
Posts: 237
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by sh yh:

Dear John,
Thanks for your excellent explanation.
Could you tell us what should be drawn instead in Cade's Component Diagrams?
TIA

Oops. I guess my answer was not clear. "A component must be diagrammed with a "link" or "realization" line to one or more of its interfaces (circle); usually this is a solid line without an arrow. "
See the book I mentioned.
John
 
Consider Paul's rocket mass heater.
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic