Dannyf Soon wrote:
Michael Zöller wrote:
I'm working on it, too. And I think not only the UC-1 is confusing concerning the wording. I changed the domain model to meet my understanding and hope that's okay with the correctors. With the given domain model I could not work.
Thanks for your response Michael.
Please see the thread regarding changing domain model where Jeanne suggested 'Personally, I would recommend against changing something that fundamental to the business.'
Jari Timonen wrote:Resubmitted. Made completely new Deployment diagram. Improved component and class diagram.
btw: very good site: uml diagrams
Dannyf Soon wrote:Hi Ranchers,
I've got question regarding the requirements for 3D Modelling Tool (a black box with xml as input and high quality model as output ) & Strong Visaul Feedback.
None of the use cases addresses these two requirements.
1. I think my component and deployment must adderess them.
2. But, for seqence diagram, can I just stick to the basic follow of uses cases and don't reflect the 3D modelling tool and visual feedback at all? Instead, I'll put as much description as possible in assumption to address them in detail. What do you think?
3. BTW, the use case only describes a successful path for an operation, e.g. "System checks for availability of the component". Can I only address that path in sequence diagram? Must I take care of the failure path or other alternative path as well?
Ranchers please share your opinion! Thanks!
Dannyf Soon wrote:Dear Ranchers,
Currently I'm working on the Factory Home assignment.
I think Component is Product too, like the house object. I made this conclusion based the UC-1 description as below:
" (after customer selects a specific component), System responds with the product detail and availability / applicability of the product, based on the current house design."
Here the word "product" appeared twice. Does it implay that the component is a product too? Agree?
The confusing domain module really gave me headache for a week. I'll appreciate any comments.
Looking forward to your response.
Sharma Ashutosh wrote: Why should there be any change in the email ID-it's @oracle.com - change is from Prometric to Pearson and nothing in terms of email Id for assignment submission.
Nilessh Ganu wrote:
Thanks Sitaram, that's a useful information.
But I am still worried about the case when I download the assignment now and submit the assignment after 31 May 2011.
I have written another mail to Oracle Customer Support asking if we can send the the assignment to email listed under(https://ibt1.prometric.com/oracle) after 31st May 2011.