• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

UML Visibility Notation (Non-normative?) How does it apply to the test?

 
Rob Mech
Ranch Hand
Posts: 56
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Im looking to find out how much UML syntax compliance plays into the exam.

Everything i've read regarding UML and the visibility always shows a +,-,#,~ for visibility notation (at least in print, e.g. UML Distilled). I completely understand why an ASCII character would be used in lieu of trying to specify a graphic. However every UML 2.x tool i've tested out seems to use some graphic instead. Now I've scanned through the UML spec which which states

Concrete syntax compliance. For a given compliance level, this entails:
� Compliance to the notation defined in the �Notation� sub clauses in this specification for those metamodel
elements that are defined as part of the merged metamodel for that compliance level and, by implication, the
diagram types in which those elements may appear. And, optionally:
� the ability to output diagrams and to read in diagrams based on the XMI schema defined by the Diagram
Interchange specification for notation at that level. This option requires abstract syntax and concrete syntax
compliance.


which to me would say that anything other than the ascii characters is non-normative.

Alright, so if it's non normative how important is this to the test? The testing guidelines simply say UML, which doesnt mean UML 1.x or 2.x. There are quite a few UML tools that work within eclipse that i'd like to use but they dont seem to "comply".

Is the UML portion of the test very vague?
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic