Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Paolo F Cantoni

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 483
Do either of the stereotypes have the _strictness property? That will mean that the two stereotypes can't both be applied and therefore you only get the option to remove one and add the new one.
That seems to be it! Thanks, Eve!

I'll review our settings to ensure correct operation.






General Board / Re: Diagram hyperlink
« on: July 07, 2020, 10:11:01 pm »
Now why did I not spot that? :'(
You might well think "That's not intuitive", I couldn't possibly say that!   ;) ;)


General Board / Re: Resources for Sparx EA?
« on: July 07, 2020, 10:09:07 pm »
Sparx for data modeling = you are in for a world of hurt.  Sparx works OK as a lightweight stopgap but is not a data modeling tool like ERwin, Embarcadero, Toad etc (don't let the brochures tell you otherwise!)
Sparx for UML modeling of processes, systems, software at any level (conceptual, logical, physical) = welcome to one of the best tools around for this. 

I guess what I'm saying is... good luck *averts eyes, gazes to the floor*
Hey Richard,
Here's something you don't see every day...  Me defending Sparx!

I agree that for Database Management and Control, EA is NOT one of the more serious tools,  but for pure data modelling, it's not too bad!  (And it's got seriously better since the introduction of the Database Builder!)

I would also question whether the other tools, ALL of which I've used, are Data Modelling tools (OK, Embarcadero comes close).

As a Data Architect of many decades experience, I much prefer EA for Data Modelling (and linkage to other subsystems).

So, it depends on what Kristy means by Data Modelling and her experience level.

For example, for understanding Data Modelling, I can thoroughly recommend "Data Modelling Essentials" by Graeme Simsion and Graham Witt - both of whom I had the pleasure of working with.  I haven't read Graeme's later book: "Data Modeling Theory and Practice", but I would assume it's up to the same standard.


General Board / Re: Diagram hyperlink
« on: July 07, 2020, 08:32:17 pm »
I have added a diagram hyperlink but cannot find a way to change the label displayed - the default is to include the namespace.
Is there a way to change to the text displayed for a diagram hyperlink?

Hi Graham,

Edit the notes.  It's a PITA, but that's how it's done.


I've accidentally found that if I BOTH extend my stereotype from a Class metaclass (with the _HideUmlLinks set to True) AND generalise it from the SysML1.4 that my stereotype pickups of the SysML block customisation (as far as I can see that is only the isEncapsulated property) and the blocking of the default Quicklinker, allowing me to customise on a per diagram type basis using the contents of the diagram toolbox.

As that works, I'll go with this option unless there is a good reason that anyone can say I shouldn't do this.
Hi Pete,
I'm not saying don't go with this option, but I would recommend doing a sensitivity analysis on the solution.
In the past (even the very recent past) I thought I had a similar "solutions" but when I went to check that the solution applied everywhere I needed it I found it didn't seem to.

Before you invest too much effort, check the scope of the solution.  That there aren't any gotchas hidden nearby.


To be honest, I couldn't care less whether Sparx considers something a bug or a feature request.
I find these discussions so very pointless. Only in a situation where you don't have to pay for bugfixes, but you do have to pay for features, I can see why you would need to make the distinction.

In all other cases, I don't make the difference at all. They are all issues and they all need to be solved.
I don't see why Sparx admitting something is a bug or telling me it's a feature request, changes something for me. They will either solve my problem or not, regardless of the bug/feature request status.

Yes, Geert, I agree with the view on Sparx.  However, that's not the thrust of this thread.  I still intend to explore the concepts, but for the present - there are more pressing issues (in your terms) that need to be dealt with so we can actually use EA as we intend.


We've been investigating supplemental stereotypes to enhance hard-coded EAUML items (such as Tables).  We have managed to get a certain way in successfully.
We have been advised by Sparx that EAUML::table does not use a shapescript.  However, it does seem to hard code some rendering (display of PK, FK etc. and display of the column size and precision etc.).  When we apply the supplemental stereotype, these rendering attributes disappear.  How can we retain them?  We tried to use drawparentshape() but to no avail.  Is it possible?


If you want to set a fixed appearance that cannot be changed by the user, you can use the shapescript.
The color set by shape scripts before calling DrawDefaultShape can still be overridden with a local diagram color.

Colors set before explicit draw commands can't be overridden.
Learn something new every day!


When trying to apply multiple stereotypes off the toolbox, sometimes the "dialog" has the Convert to function and other times Apply function.  What triggers the difference in the MDG specification?

There are subsidiary questions I want to ask, but they may be sorted by the answer to this question.


Bugs and Issues / Re: Tagged value default is applied wrong
« on: July 02, 2020, 08:51:15 pm »
In the database the value is null, so it's only in the GUI that I see the default value.


That's one of my inconsistency defects.  You'll have seen my rants on the various forms of tagged values and how the defaults are treated differently.


Bugs and Issues / Re: Tagged value default is applied wrong
« on: July 02, 2020, 06:33:56 pm »
Hi Geert,

Did you actually get a default value in the DB or did you just see the default in the properties window or dialog?

I'm fighting my own battles about default as you probably know.  The whole thing is self-inconsistent so we have to write automata to achieve consistent results.


Thanks, Eve, for the input.

But I was considering this in a more abstract sense.  We too have users and I want to try and come up with a conceptual model that allows me to discuss with them (and with Sparx and other suppliers) "what's going on".

Can we all agree that "There is no such thing as an inconsistently correct system."  Thus if we find an inconsistency, then it is some form of defect!  The degree and source of the inconsistency are what we can debate?

By that, I mean that something may be inconsistent at one level but be consistent at another level.  Eve's example is a case in point!  Where this kind of issue comes up, then an explanation of the degree and level of consistency will help the user.  Eve's example demonstrates the "Eric Morecombe paradox"[1]

Getting back to our consistently correct system, when we see a behaviour in one part of the system it is legitimate to expect the same (i.e. consistent) behaviour in other parts of the system.

How does that sound as a starting point?


[1] Eric Morecombe was one half of the comedic duo "Morecombe and Wise". His paradox was to put his finger under Ernie's (Wise) chin and challenge him to "Go on; get out of that without moving!"  As you can see, It can't be done.

I've personally had little to do with the Visio import. If you're having issues I would definitely recommend sending a sample through to support. At the moment I'd just be making a bad guess.
Sample sent.  Interestingly, the import showed NO errors on import (unlike the older version) but still no relationships imported.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 483