UML 2.0 Component diagram

[Srinivasan Rengan]

I am using Star UML for building my component diagram. I liked the tier based grouped approach of Humphrey Sheil. But unfortunately starUML does not assist with the complete support for UML 2.0 (at least from component diagram angle)

Now I am trying to mimic Humphrey Sheil's diagram using a Annotation rectangle and a normal component box put together. But I not fully convinced with this.

Any one else found or still finding the same difficulty? Any alternatives welcome!!

Thanks in advance!!
Srini

[P Das]

Did you try component diagram of Visual Paradigm Community edition?

[Paul Yip]

You may try Red Koda Community.
It supports 13 UML 2 diagrams including Component diagram.
Easy to install and use. Free UML Tool

[P Das]

Tried to download but faced "connection was reset" persistently; any insider information of what's happening? I only need the latest community edition (for windows xp/7).

[Paul Yip]

Hi P Das,

You can download 3.0.6 from download.com first.

http://download.cnet.com/Red-Koda-Community/3000-2383_4-75221678.html?tag=mncol;1

I'll try to update download.com version to 3.0.7 later on. Thanks.

[P Das]

You don't need to: it says it is a trial version; what I was looking for is a community version [free stuff :-)]. Thank you for your responsiveness.

[Ravi Iyer]

Hi Srinivasan

I've used StarUML myself - there are several places where I found the tool to be lacking compared to what Sheil showed in his diagrams - your example, jsp stereotype, etc.
However, I used suitable alternatives - ex: in place of the "cylinder" used to represent Database in my component diagram, i used a cube (didn't see the cylinder option).

However it all seems to have been accepted

Rgds

[P Das]

Is it that Sun accepts cylinders or cubes as regular components in the Component Diagram? Is that standard UML?

[Srinivasan Rengan]

Hi All...

Thanks for all your responses...

I am thoroughly convinced that Visual Paradigm Community edition is a wonderful tool

Star UML is also good, but for the complete compliance to UML 2.0, VP scores better :-)

Thanks
Srini

[Ravi Iyer]

I don't know if UML 2.0 compliance requires "cubes" instead of "cylinders" for a database representation - my intention was to point out that we don't have to show things exactly like Sheil - visual deviation seems to be ok with the examiners as long as basic UML compliance is kept in mind and the diagram represents the design clearly.

@Srinivasan - to be honest, mid way, I was really considering changing my UML too. However, having spent days and weekends on the solution, I just wanted to submit and get it over with so I didn't do that.
Best of luck to you.

Rgds