• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Tim Cooke
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Ron McLeod
  • Junilu Lacar
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • Paul Clapham
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Henry Wong
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Tim Holloway
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Piet Souris
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Jesse Duncan
  • Frits Walraven
  • Mikalai Zaikin

Connectors in UML2.0 compliant component diagram

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 145
8
Mac MySQL Database Java Ubuntu
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hello Ranchers,

I am trying to understand how to create a UML2.0 compliant component diagram, and I found that different sources suggest different ways of how to show component’s internal structure - particularly, what kind of lines to use for delegating and assembling connectors.

I checked 4 different sources:

(1)“UML Distilled” book by Martin Fowler (sorry, no link)
(2)Section about component diagram on “Agile Modeling” web site, by Scott Amber - http://www.agilemodeling.com/artifacts/componentDiagram.htm
(3)Section about component diagram on IBM developer works web site - http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/dec04/bell/index.html
(4)Section about component diagram on uml-diagrams.org - http://www.uml-diagrams.org/component-diagrams.html

I found that these four resources draw connectors in different way:

For “delegating” connector:
(1)dashed line, open arrow
(2)solid line, open arrow, <<delegate>> stereotype
(3)solid line, open arrow, <<delegate>> stereotype
(4)solid line, no arrow

For “assembly” connector:
(1)solid line, no arrows, no annotation
(2)dashed line, open arrow
(3)ball and socket
(4)ball and socket

How come that four reputable sources explain standard diagram in such different ways ?
Does anyone know if these connectors are standardized at all ? What does the standard say about it ?
 
Marshal
Posts: 17009
298
Mac Android IntelliJ IDE Eclipse IDE Spring Debian Java Ubuntu Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I wouldn't agonize too much about differences and "standards" -- it's not worth it, IMO. If you have any concerns that the notation you use in your diagrams will be misunderstood, why not just include a legend and maybe a brief Help section to explain what you mean when you use each different type of connector. See my thoughts about UML and similar notations in this thread
 
pie. tiny ad:
Building a Better World in your Backyard by Paul Wheaton and Shawn Klassen-Koop
https://coderanch.com/wiki/718759/books/Building-World-Backyard-Paul-Wheaton
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic