I passed today SCEA Part II&III with Score 90.
Class Diagram (44 maximum) .......................... 39 Component Diagram (44 maximum) ...................... 40 Sequence/Colloboration Diagrams (12 maximum) ........ 11
I could make it only after resubmitting of my assignment. First time I took only 69 points. Only the one point I needed to pass I was very angry to SUN that I didn't understand where point was lost.
After the revision of my work and topics of this forum I decided that my main mistake was approach to class diagrams. I had several detail class diagrams for clients, controller, business logic, adapters and etc. But on SUN opinion, class diagram is mainly a conceptual model closely connected to the business domain. It is a contradiction in terms. I couldn’t find any samples of such UML class diagrams in SUN documents :x
So, I only added the conceptual class diagram and the high level component diagram for summarizing architectural view of my work. I had taken additional 21 points!
Lot of thanks to all for hints that found in these threads. It’s really helpful!!!
You should be able to help me in realizing what mistakes I made.
I didnt clear the assignment exam and am in the same state as you were on the first attempt. I am frustrated because I dont know where I lost points.
I scored 12/12 in the sequence diagram but lost big time in the class(26) and component diagrams(25).
For the class diagram I had the main page showing the packages and subsequent pages showed the classes in each package and their relationships.
I had a data model diagram.
I did not show any Java client classes.
I had no JSPs in the class diagram.
For the component diagram I had multiple pages and they were organized as below
- showing all the JSPs and their sub elements like tag handlers etc in one page
- ejb components and their relationships with components from other layers in one page
- A component diagram showing the generic components of each layer and their relationship with the generic components in the adjoining layer.
When I say generic component I mean JSP components are represented by a generic JSP component. In another component diagram I have shown each JSP used as a separate component which derives from this generic JSP component.
So my questions are
1) What is the difference you see between my diagrams and your diagrams?
2) Did you depict JSPs in the class diagrams?
3) What UML tool did you use?
4) What material did you refer for component diagrams?
5) Did you have the Java client classes as well in your class diagrams?
6) Also for the EJB classes I have a diagram showing all the ejb classes such as home-interface, primaryKey, etc deriving from the corresponding javax package classes. But the only thing I missed out was the methods in the standard javax package classes like ejbCreate(..) as I thought these are standard classes and hence when you mention the fully qualified path it should be self-explanatory. Did you show these methods in your classes?
posted 11 years ago
1) First time I also made the package diagram, the subclass class diagrams and the DB data model. It isn't wrong. However, I think, the SUN estimation assessment process is rather formal and they expected that some types of diagrams must present. So, after my second revision I have had the following diagrams:
- The conceptual class diagram. In this diagram only logical items and they relationships is presented without any aspects of program realization;
- The high-level package diagram. In my case each package is closely related to a logical layer: a clients, a controller, a business logic, a adapters and etc;
- The high-level component diagram. I placed on it such component as a clients, controller, business logical classes, entity classes, any services;
- The class diagram for each logical layer. I used it primary for demonstrating a design patterns applying in my work;
- The sequence diagrams.
2) No, I only listed all jsp in a table.
4)UML specification and common example in articles which I could find in the net.
5) Yes I have the detailed class diagram for a swing client, but I depicted only 7-8 classes on it
6) No I didn’t. In my opinion a standard ejb methods only obstruct understanding of diagram. I show only a functional methods like getAvailableSet(), payByCard() and the like.
posted 11 years ago
Thank you very much for your reply.
I now know what I shouldv done for the class diagram.
But, I still dont know about the component diagrams.
In my component diagrams I had the following:
- 1 diagram showing the entire architecture with one component representing every layer. Eg:
FrontController --> BusinessDelegate --> SessionFacade --> EntityBean etc
- 1 diagram to show all the entity beans and the related components
- 1 diagram to show all the JSPs and the tag handlers
I have used only dependency relation between my components with stereotypes like uses, creates and removes
With the above 3 diagrams I have shown almost all the components in all the layers of my design.
So my questions are
1) Did you use lollipop representation in your component diagrams?
2) Did you show the ejb components as containing the standard interfaces and the descriptor file?
Component diagrams have the facility to show components inside components.
3) Was there a 1-to-1 mapping between the classes in your class diagram and the components?
I mean to ask if every component in your diagram could be mapped to a class in your class diagrams.
4) Did you show the relation or association between each component?
For Eg: I mean, did you show every business-delegate and session-facade classes as components with their specific names and their relationships as dependency with steretype as uses.
SCJP 1.4, SCWCD 1.4 - Hints for you, Certified Scrum Master
Did a rm -R / to find out that I lost my entire Linux installation!
posted 11 years ago
1. Yes, I did. I used a UML 2.x notation. The example of this you can see on http://www.agilemodeling.com/artifacts/componentDiagram.htm ;
2. I showed all interface for only one EJB component, for example. I didn’t show descriptor files;
3. No, my class diagram was rather abstract. It consisted of such logical items as Iteneraty, Segment, Fligth and so on. My component diagram was more coupled with a realization details. It contained, for example, IteneratyFacadeEJB, IteneratyEJB components and etc;
4. I showed in detail only EJB layer components for corresponding to class diagram. Business-delegate components I represented as one abstract component. I showed relationship between EJB components with stereotype “CRM”