Skip to main content

How important is complete coverage of UML?

  10 posts   Feedicon  
Replies: 9 - Last Post: March 05, 2011 06:02
by: ncgsoftware
showing 1 - 10 of 10
Posted: January 01, 2011 20:43 by javydreamercsw
Is it okay to just support the most used parts of UML for now or is it a requirement that we implement the entire UML standard?
Are Class and Sequence diagrams more important than Component and Deployment diagrams, and therefore is it fair/suitable to worry primarily about them and work on filling in the gaps later?
Should we support UML 1.0 for legacy reasons, or support only the latest UML standard?
Does anyone know if UML is backwards compatible?
Posted: January 03, 2011 13:19 by Goran Miskovic
The UML lacked a defined way of describing and transporting diagrams with all their layout information. Perhaps the most important change is that UML 2.0 brings an XML-based diagram interchange standard.
IMHO we should implement UML 2.x.
More information on differences between UML 1.x and UML 2.x can be found here.

Following diagrams are defined in UML 2.x:
  • Activity Diagram
  • Class Diagram
  • Communication/Collaboration Diagram
  • Component Diagram
  • Composite Structure Diagram
  • Deployment Diagram
  • Interaction Overview Diagram
  • Object Diagram
  • Package Diagram
  • Sequence Diagram
  • State Machine Diagram
  • Timing Diagram
  • Use Case Diagram


Find more on each diagram here

As mentioned previously, IMHO we should keep it as simple as possible and in the first version implement only three most important diagrams.
Posted: January 03, 2011 23:00 by javydreamercsw
Completely agree! Seems like UML 2.x plus SVG conversion makes a lot of sense to me. The only issue I have is lack of knowledge on SVG.
Posted: January 04, 2011 00:50 by Goran Miskovic
If we can (re)use VMD and especially synchronization of underlaying SVG file with the designer state you will not have a problem. Smile
Posted: January 05, 2011 20:27 by davace

This list seems good to me too - I'll add it to the wiki. Its now visible on the page:

Oh, and I think Use Case diagrams need to be moved up to "Phase 2" (see wiki page). Whilst I personally think they are silly and that a requirements document would work better, they definitely seem integral to many software design processes that make use of UML. And I think that those that do use UML to completely design their software (before implementation begins) will choose to avoid Netbeans if such functionality is not provided - which would be a shame as Netbeans has a lot to offer.


@Goran I decided to make four categories, which I thought were more specific and more distinguishable than just an "importance" scale. I placed all of the diagrams in your list within the top three of these - according to your list. But, please look at the page and tell me if you think I've misrepresented your ideas, or you want to move something (but I'm sure you will :)

Posted: March 05, 2011 06:02 by ncgsoftware
I agree with the [b]UML Coverage and Compliance[b] wiki page. The goal should be to be completely compliant with UML 2.x, I don't think (as a new product) that we should worry about UML 1.x.

I prefer the idea of doing the most popular first, making sure that we get it right before adding a more.
Posted: January 04, 2011 14:28 by javydreamercsw
Sounds like you (Goran) are the first volunteer to join the GUI team. You seem to have the knowledge to work on SVG and probably evaluate VDM for re-usability.
Posted: January 06, 2011 16:20 by davace
With complete respect to those involved, could we please move discussion of SVG and associated modules to the GUI framework topic? Such issues have nothing to do with "Complete Coverage". Alternatively we could set up a new Topic for the SVG discussion if you think its needed?
Posted: January 12, 2011 13:14 by Mertins
I and six developers use:
Class Diagrams - Day to day to see de Model Domain that we link with SGDB with JPA
Activity Diagrams - Some times
Sequence Diagrams - Some times
Use Case Diagrams - Some times (JDeveloper has what we need - Me and my team - see pg 4)

Rarely other diagrams



Posted: January 15, 2011 23:57 by ebresie
I think a complete coverage is good to make the tool more appealing. Different people need specific model elements, but I believe what's listed are good starting point..

I seem to recall the UML spec has some compliance related criteria defined. Might be good starting point for helping in compliance (and testing).
showing 1 - 10 of 10
Replies: 9 - Last Post: March 05, 2011 06:02
by: ncgsoftware
Please Confirm