Win a copy of The Little Book of Impediments (e-book only) this week in the Agile and Other Processes forum!
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Representing VOs

 
George Gastaldi
Greenhorn
Posts: 4
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
How do I represent the VOs in my project ? I guess the class Diagram should be technology-agnostic, and should contain only the business model, not implementation details.

So, should I put them in the Component Diagram ? But then I guess this is an implementation detail. Or not ?

Any suggestions ?
 
Joseph A Alexander
Greenhorn
Posts: 23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
VOs need not be a part of Component Diagram. You need to provide those in Class Diagram.
[ February 22, 2007: Message edited by: Joseph Alexander ]
 
Francis Sommers
Greenhorn
Posts: 13
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I'm just completing my assignment and currently have the Value objects on my component diagram. I'm of the mindset that the class diagram should include only the businesss objects. I had tossed the idea of including Value objects, Business Delegates, Service locators etc. on my class diagram but decided to include them only in the component diagram because they are needed to realize the business classes. I'd be interested in what others have to say about this.
 
Nitin Singh
Greenhorn
Posts: 24
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
In my opinion Component diagram should not contain VOs, rather it should contain higher level Components which provide services or has some behaviour. VOs could go in the Class diagrams.
 
George Gastaldi
Greenhorn
Posts: 4
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Francis Sommers:
I'm just completing my assignment and currently have the Value objects on my component diagram. I'm of the mindset that the class diagram should include only the businesss objects. I had tossed the idea of including Value objects, Business Delegates, Service locators etc. on my class diagram but decided to include them only in the component diagram because they are needed to realize the business classes. I'd be interested in what others have to say about this.


Francis, I think of that too.
Could anyone that already got SCEA could please answer to this post ?

Thanks.
 
Joseph A Alexander
Greenhorn
Posts: 23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Component Diagrams are used show the interfaces/services exposed by "programs" (like one or more POJOs packed together, EJBs, Webservices etc) and how they interact with each other.

For example, if you have an EJB for Order Processing, then it will be a component in your component diagram. Granular level details like attributes, methods, arguments of this service wont be exposed/provided in the component diagrams.

Value Objects are very granular structures used to encapsulate the business data. These are not complex enough to be qualified to be put in Component Diagrams.

Class diagrams should be granular and detailed, which should contain each and every class we use in the application and its relationship with other classes.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Joseph, SCEA
[ February 23, 2007: Message edited by: Joseph Alexander ]
 
Chintan Rajyaguru
Ranch Hand
Posts: 341
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
class diagram should include only the businesss objects.


George and Francis, why do you think that?

C
 
Francis Sommers
Greenhorn
Posts: 13
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I do agree that the component diagrams should show how the application is assembled and that Transfer objects are a bit fine grained for a component diagram but I am not completely sure they belong in a top level class diagram either. I'm going to put my transfer objects on my class diagram now. Joseph or Nitin what do you think about Business Delegate and Service Locator objects. Should these go on the class diagram also or should they be on the component diagram ?
 
Nitin Singh
Greenhorn
Posts: 24
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Putting more classes in class diagrams is always good but its a trade off between what is required most vs nice to have.
I would include Business Delegates and Service lcoators in Component diagram coz they are higher level and close to components.
In class diagrams we should try to elaborate more on business/domain classes and serivce classes like EJBs and Utility classes with their relationships (which is the most important). I would not put standard classes like Business Delegates and Service locators which are self explanatory.
[ February 24, 2007: Message edited by: Nitin Singh ]
 
Joseph A Alexander
Greenhorn
Posts: 23
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I would suggest to put the Business Delegate and Service Locators in the Component diagrams.

If your Component diagram is messy (with so many components), then you can avoid putting the BD & SL and explain the approach of calling the services from client tier separately.
[ February 26, 2007: Message edited by: Joseph Alexander ]
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic