William Taylor

Greenhorn
+ Follow
since Feb 11, 2009
Cows and Likes
Cows
Total received
0
In last 30 days
0
Total given
0
Likes
Total received
0
Received in last 30 days
0
Total given
0
Given in last 30 days
0
Forums and Threads
Scavenger Hunt
expand Ranch Hand Scavenger Hunt
expand Greenhorn Scavenger Hunt

Recent posts by William Taylor

Thanks for all ranchers who have posted messages for SCEA 5 assignment. I have also just received a "P" status today.
Finally I submitted my assignment and got SCEA 5 certified today!

Oleg Kuzin wrote:Hi all.
I've just got a P status after resumission which means I'm SCEA now. Although I consider my first solution to be better than the resubmitted one.
Thanks to everyone who shared their ideas and thoughts.
Cheers and good luck!
Oleg



Hi Oleg,

So house itself is a composite component in your design? Do you think components like Foundation and walls are products themselves? Thanks a lot.
Hi there,

I am thinking the risks are concerns like "how to provide strong visual feedback", "how's the interface between stock management system and my system", etc.

What do you think?

JJ Walker wrote:the validation of the valid combination of inventory should be from the Stock Inventory and Management System.

Regarding the relation between House, Product and CompletedDesign, I am thinking House is the outcome after customer add all the component to it; Product is after the required feature(heating, plumbing) is added to the house, (may) including deriving the cost; and CompletedDesign is after customer select 1 or more product to form a final design, which is ready to be discussed with Sales Rep.

What do you think?



My understanding is all components including the house itself are products of Factory Homes. The house is composed of other components like walls and foundation. In this way, a CompletedDesign can be associated with multiple products. Anyone share the same opinion? Thanks.
Shall JSF application controller be shown in "application server" node or "web server" node? I appreciate if you can give me a hint.

Thanks.
9 years ago
Shall we put JPA entities in the component diagram? I think it adds too much detail, however, the requirement asks to show major POJOs in the Component Diagram.

If it is necessary, what the dependencies? Let EJBs depend on entities, then entities depend on the external inventory system looks weird...

Any suggestion? Thanks a lot.

rafael liu wrote:

The company has recently invested in a state of the art stock inventory and management
system that controls all inventory and valid combinations of inventory in the Factory Homes
catalog. This system is accessible using a well-defined set of web services.



I was designing it as a subsystem that would store and retrive components for me. The Wall, Door, etc in my application would be just for binding the Web Service response into a POJO, it wouldn't be store in my data base. The House, Product, etc would be in my data base only with references to its components.

I don't see how it would work if this system was only for validation.. You would pass a set of components combination just to check validity?



I don't see why we cannot have components like Walls and Doors in our database. If House, Product, etc. can be there with references to its components, it might be OK to have components themselves stored in our database also. For example, listing categories and adding a new component to a design can be easily done without invoking the Web Services. Only when checking availability and applicability for a new component, we need to validate against the inventory system. In this way, the inventory system only holds the business logic while the database does CRUD operations for the system.

By storing references to components in your approach, would there be too many invocations to the inventory subsystem? How about just store the XML house representation or store everything in the inventory system?

rafael liu wrote:Wow, that's weird, my reply appeared as an edit of yours..

I wrote:

CompletedDesign is for me an "interaction with the system", this way in the same interaction the Customer can build 2, 3, * houses. Anyway, I'm changing this domain model..



In your understanding the House itself would be in the Inventory System?



I don't think so. To me, the inventory system only takes care of inventory validation.

rafael liu wrote:That's what I thought at first, but there's no way to have a Product without a CompletedDesign, there simply is no Use Case that would build a Product without creating a respective CompletedDesign. And even if it had, there is no Use Case that would pick this pre-built house.


Don't mix the concept of completedDesign and product. Completed designs come from the online design application by customers, however, products are of the company of Factory Homes, which are designed aleady.

CompletedDesign is for me an "interaction with the system", this way in the same interaction the Customer can build 2, 3, * houses. Anyway, I'm changing this domain model..

Hi Rafael,

I think it makes sense that a product does not match any completed design. It simply means no client has chosen that product yet.

While a completed design must finally map to one product of Factory Homes, even the company has a lot of pre-built models. So one on the Product end holds. However, I don't understand what n on this end means.

The problem is that we need to specify patterns in component diagrams. What is the pattern for resource dependency injection in JEE 5?
Regarding the 3D modelling tool, I don't think we shall include it in the class diagram because it is an external interface. An SLSB VisualProcessor that depends on CompletedDesign in the class diagram will suffice.

I cannot agree that "Design is a collection of products which can be a a house or shopping mall or town homes etc.. ". I don't think the application is going to extend in this way. To design a shopping mall, user must complete design of a shopping mall instead of just designing a store then the system generates a shopping mall. It is still 1 to 1 in this regard. The only explanation making sense to me is to take house styles and accessories into account. Factory Homes might have multiple products with the same components (foundation, wall, roof and apertures). However, styles like number of rooms and location of garage as well as accessories might be different. In this way, one completed design can map to one or more products.

However, we also have the requirement "filling in required features as necessary to arrive at an indicate cost". With house styles and accessories associating with more than one products, the cost cannot be the price of one product. Maybe "indicative" just means rough or not inclusive...
Can someone explain what Product means here? Will every component like Foundation, Wall, Roof and House itself be products?

Thanks a lot.
Could someone explain what is your understanding of the relationship between CompletedDesign and Product? If Product is the same as House (1 to 1), why completed design and product has 0-* and 1-* relationship?

Thank you very much for your help.