Author Topic: SysML connector types  (Read 2600 times)

marke

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
SysML connector types
« on: May 01, 2013, 01:48:54 am »
The OMG standard shows that connectors between ports or parts on an ibd can be typed. EA doesn't seem to allow typing of connectors. Am I missing a trick or is this an omission?

Thank you, Mark

Gary

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 84
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2013, 05:19:25 pm »
Sorry Mark

Can you clarify what you mean by type? Where in the spec is it? Which version of the spec? It will help us to help you.

Gary
« Last Edit: May 01, 2013, 05:20:07 pm by u1rvkt »

marke

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2013, 08:07:55 pm »
Hi Gary,

SysML 1.3: Table 8.2 & section 8.3.2.3. Also Fig 7.47 (p164) in "A Practical Guide to SysML (2nd Ed) by Friedenthal et al".

I was expecting that when I bring up a connector's properties (in this instance in an ibd) that there would be somewhere to specify the type (as you can in a port's properties).

Mark

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9590
  • Karma: +168/-148
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2013, 08:29:52 pm »
You need to open Advanced/Change Type from the context menu. Usually you create the right connector beforehand (from the profile toolbox).

q.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 08:30:25 pm by qwerty »

marke

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2013, 08:47:02 pm »
Hi q,

I'm not talking about the type of connector (e.g. abstraction, aggregations etc) but the type associated with the connector. For example, the type of the connector between a router and a PC might be an Ethernet Cable.

See page 24 in http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/events/frontiers2011/1.3_Friedenthal.pdf. The connector between the PlugIF and the SocketIF has been typed by an association block.

Mark

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9590
  • Karma: +168/-148
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2013, 09:16:53 pm »
I see. AFAIK EA can't do that. The SysML plugin might have a solution, though. I don't know. But there is no concept in EA for a relation instance like you have it for classes. You could fake that by naming the connector with a leading colon.

q.

Gary

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 84
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2013, 11:25:22 pm »
Mark

I don't have the SysML 1.3 on my EA as I am using EA9.3.
I Know how to create an association block and have that link to the association between two blocks.
To do this:

Create the association between the required blocks.
Right click on the block to be the association block
Select Association class
Select the association link from the list.
The association block will then be linked to the association.

Gary

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9590
  • Karma: +168/-148
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2013, 11:45:26 pm »
Gary, this creates the association along with the association class. But not an instance of that.

q.

natvig

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Karma: +7/-0
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2013, 11:01:00 pm »
Connectors (that can be runtime instances of associations) should be able to be 'typed' by the association that is its type, see section 9.3.6 in UML Spec issue 2.4.1. This is UML 2.0 (has been included in the standard for nearly 10 years) and not something which is specific to SysML. This is an important feature still missing in EA. Perhaps the need to specify a classname of an association that the connector represents is higher in SysML than in UML and that the need to include this feature into EA is greater than ever.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2013, 11:01:27 pm by natvig »

philchudley

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 537
  • Karma: +9/-0
  • UML/EA Principal Consultant / Trainer
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #9 on: July 05, 2013, 12:52:21 am »
I am afraid this is not possible  >:(

The closest you will get is:

1) Create a connector between your ports
2) Right-click on the connector
3) Select Advanced
4) Select Information Flows Realized
5) Create a new classifier (valueType etc) or navigate to select a valueType
6) This shows Black Arrow notation

But yes it is NOT an instance as the spec states  >:(

This is because for Information Flows Realized, EA insists on a classifier and instances cannot be classifiers.

I do not know of an elegant work around

Cheers

Phil
follow me on Twitter

@SparxEAGuru

qwerty

  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9590
  • Karma: +168/-148
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
Re: SysML connector types
« Reply #10 on: July 05, 2013, 05:50:13 am »
The problem from my point of view is that UML as published by OMG is a neat language, but entirely described in English language. Not in UML itself. UML will only be communicable with appropriate tools and EA isn't the worst. I see a couple of issues in Superstructures. Just the chapter 9.3.6 you pointed out states
Quote
Each connector may be attached to two or more connectable elements
EA can't do that. It offers only connection between two elements. And inherently it will not be able to represent connectors between more than two element.

However, I never missed that feature. Nor a great couple of other ones I never came across. And definitely most UML users use less than 10% of UML's capabilities. Probably like English where most people use only a small part of the full language.

Finally, I think a practical approach is to USE a language and tune elements which are used often. OMG tends to construct some esoteric language with all bells and whistles. This is not what I think is efficient.

I wonder how many people know about Superstructure, how many have read parts of it, how many have read it completely and how many have understood recent parts of it.

q.