• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Question on Class Diagram (Part 2)

 
Hemant
Greenhorn
Posts: 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
I have a question on class diagram for part-2.
How detailed is it required to list out the classes?
Is it sufficient to list the Entity, Session and Helper classes only and display the relationships or do we need to specify the details of each bean its local, remote interfaces etc..
Any suggestions..
 
Ajith Kallambella
Sheriff
Posts: 5782
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Team Work
Thanks for joining JavaRanch.
Unfortunately your name violates our naming policy. Please take a quick look at the rules and edit your profile accordingly.
Thank you!
 
Bharat Ruparel
Ranch Hand
Posts: 493
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Take a look at Mark Cade's book. He has a good example. I am following it in terms of details to present and how much lee-way do we have in terms of extending/modifying the BDM model.
Regards.
Bharat
 
Priya Patel
Greenhorn
Posts: 23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The class diagram should be detailed enough to encompass the full requirements of the BDM including extension strategies to accomodate a plausible architecture however it should be also concise enough to quickly facilitate knowledge transfer.
My class diagram contained over 30 classes.
I did not show *ANY* J2EE extension classes.
Depending on your prospective, a CLASS diagram is not meant to be technology dependant but must have a biased towards the BDM. The component diagram is where you *show off* your J2EE skills with respect to classes, design patterns and architecture.
FYI, I received 41/44 for my class diagram.
 
Tomas Cirip
Greenhorn
Posts: 13
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Priya Patel:
I did not show *ANY* J2EE extension classes.

Priya,
What do you mean by 'J2EE extension classes'? Mark Cade is shows Stateless Session beans in the class diagram, isn't that 'technology dependent'?
Thanks
 
Kevin Olivieri
Greenhorn
Posts: 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi Priya,
If you did not have any J2EE classes in your class diagram, I guess your sequence diagram did not include those either, correct? Just curious what approach you took... for me it seems kind of difficult to think of a sequence diagram for a J2EE application without showing any of the J2EE elements... I've heard that other people showed the J2EE classes/patterns only in the component diagram...
 
Bharat Ruparel
Ranch Hand
Posts: 493
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hello Priya,
Thanks for your informative posts! They have been quite helpful. I think that we have a slight difference of opinion. Ideally speaking, I agree with you that the "classic" class-diagram shouldn't include any technology specific classes. However, by definition, we are going for a technology specific certification, i.e., SCEA which applies specifically to the J2EE technology. Therefore, the use of certain technology specific "hook" classes into the class diagram is quite OK, that is how the J2EE specifc design will connect to the underlying domain model anyway. I think that Cade's representation of the Stateless Session Bean Controller classes is very clever and quite deliberate on his part. Moreover, that also indicates that he is trying to accomodate both the "thick" (GUI/Swing) client and "thin" (HTML/JSP/Servlet). Considering that, I find his use of a few "controller" classes as "hooks" into the rest of the technology independent class diagram quite acceptable.
What do you think?
Regards and thanks.
Bharat
[ April 19, 2004: Message edited by: Bharat Ruparel ]
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic