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 ... 458
Suggestions and Requests / Re: Dynamic Legends: text color support
« on: December 09, 2019, 10:25:30 am »
All properties are equal, ut some are more equal than others...



User interface/interaction design 101...



Richard, have you tried resetting IDs?  In the past transferring to/from an MS Access file could leave the IDs in an anomalous state.  We always compacted and repaired the file after the transfer to reset the IDS.  Now, EA is supposed to do that automatically.  However, for a Firebird file you may still need to reset the IDs via the appropriate menu option.


General Board / Re: Templates and report specifications
« on: December 05, 2019, 11:24:14 am »
Thanks, Geert, report packages and master documents were not only the answer that I was looking for but as I wrote elsewhere to provide the means of segregating the documentation from the actual models. It is a very elegant way of placing the documentation and the models in separate branches of the repository. As a result, this allows the creation of a documentation view which differs from the actual structure of your models.
I couldn't agree more  :)



General Board / Re: Repository work process for common object catalouges
« on: December 04, 2019, 10:53:38 am »
Hi Steen,

A few questions to establish your context so we can provide appropriate advice.  By the way, there were some discussions recently on similar topics so search the forum (within the last 3 months).

Is this an enterprise-wide repository or more narrow (e.g. product based)?

Currently, when a project needs to "clone" (the term is used generically) a production item (for example, in order to change it), how is that achieved?  How is the cloned item (doppelganger) linked back to its "master"?

Do you have a Control Board for the Production Trunk at present?


Suggestions and Requests / Re: Database builder - differences report
« on: December 02, 2019, 10:34:01 am »
We are now really starting to use the database builder in EA to track the changes in the database with each release.

The option to compare the database model with the actual database is really useful and helps us a lot, but I can't seem to find a way to create an offline export of the differences.
I would like to put them in excel or something so we can go over the list and validate each one of them.

The ability to copy/paste from the grid in EA to excel would already be sufficient.

I'll send in a feature request.

We'd like the same. Should I also send in a feature request?


General Board / Re: Where did "instance" go?
« on: December 02, 2019, 10:32:07 am »
P.S. (3): Somehow, this reminds of W.V. Quine concept of radical translation, whereupon a linguist encounters a community whose language is completely unrelated to any language familiar to the linguist and the linguist has to attempt to fully translate the unfamiliar language. We are linguists attempting to translate a technical language to plain English and discussing how different technical languages are to be translated into each other. I think the later is a good exercise. I always have some resistance to the former because technical languages are there to express something non-technical languages cannot express.

I couldn't disagree with this point more. One of the goals of ArchiMate was to render technical descriptions in plain language (I'm unsure if this was meant to be English or Dutch).  The translation problem isn't because ArchiMate is an unknown or alien language, it's because it's the equivalent of operating with the understanding of vocabulary and grammar of a three-year-old.
I think Glassboy has "hit the nail on the head".  It's what prompted my post last week.  To say that business-level items don't have properties of features is a non-sense to me.  It's a simplistic (NOT simple, TOO simple) view.

Also, the notion that you have to separate the structural properties from the behaviour properties is suspect.   I have actor "X" and I have a business object "data about actor X" (if I haven't misunderstood) seems stupid to me.


General Board / Re: Where did "instance" go?
« on: November 29, 2019, 10:37:26 am »

Just reiterating that, for the present, I'm NOT interested in the elements in a repository (UML or ArchiMate things), but merely the language we use to converse.  I don't know where Modesto or Rhys are located (I suspect the UK), but they and I (as examples) have never met and need to be able to communicate unambiguously using only the written word.  Having (as per the Helsinki Principle) agreed on our terminology/ontology, we can then look at how we put these things in a repository.

Previously Modesto said:
"ArchiMate is a name only modelling language, the ArchiMate specification does not mention attributes and operations anywhere when describing the metamodel. As a result, no features are inherited when specialising in ArchiMate because there are no features to be inherited."

I agree with his statement (about ArchiMate) however, it seems to me that the concept of a "name only modelling language" is a non-sequitur!

One can't create falsifiable models when, as in Alice in Wonderland[2], a "word can mean whatever I want it to mean".  There need to be more formal differentiation mechanisms than just the name, otherwise, I can say BMW X3 is a specialization of BMW X1!

So, let us accept that the things we are modelling can be characterised by their features.  Features are defined by their nature (Structural and Behavioural) and by the characteristic they describe.  Thus a structural feature for a motor car might be body type, for a bird a behavioural feature might be migration behaviour.

Some things are specializations of other things.  In modelling, we normally associate specialization with "inheritance" of features.  In order to be an inheritor, the specialized item must have a different feature set than the more general item.  Cetacean is a special form of Mammal.  Hierarchies of this type of inheritance are classification schemes.  Classification schemes have depth and the item can only be one classification in one scheme.  However, schemes can be orthogonal.

But colloquially, we also observe a different type of specialization, that of restriction.  A completed order is a special form of an order.  Non-modellers would certainly say they were talking about specialization.  Restrictions are Categorisations - shallow and overlapping.



[2] Alice in Wonderland: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."

Bugs and Issues / Re: Tagged value notes in 15
« on: November 28, 2019, 10:29:12 am »
The options they control are either enabled or disabled

From a developer's point of view, enabled and disabled denote whether a control will allow user input, with disabled controls usually being "greyed out". Is that what you are referring to here?
Yes, KP,  I should have been more careful. 

We need to distinguish between the state of the visual control and the state of the underlying variable controlled by the control.

I'll amend my terminology.

Thanks for the catch...  I'm always trying to be as clear as I can - for my own sanity if nothing else...


Uml Process / Re: Shape For Connector / Continuation
« on: November 27, 2019, 10:20:03 am »
Thanks.  That's exactly it.

Is there a way to use have multiple participants use the same connector symbol?  I'm thinking of something like a BPMN Link Event where a number of decisions can throw out to a single point.  What I'm trying to do is avoid drawing control lines from multiple places into a single decision.

IIRC NO.  There are, in addition, many issues around these symbols.  Search for posts by me on the subject.


Bugs and Issues / Re: Tagged value notes in 15
« on: November 27, 2019, 09:47:35 am »
[NOTE: The original post has been modified as a result of input from KP]
Wow, I'm glad it was enabled by default, or I would have never found that option  :o
I didn't disable it, but we upgraded from 13.5 so maybe that's a factor.

Well actually, it's a negative option meaning that when you enable it (tick the box) you disable ("hide") the integrated notes view, so strictly speaking I didn't not disable it, but instead didn't enable it, but it was enabled by default after the upgrade -- "it" meaning the option, not the visibility of the notes. Which was disabled, and which I re-enabled by disabling the option.

One for Paolo there. :D

Duly noted!

As correspondents may have noticed, I use specific terms for dealing with so-called Check-boxes.   The boxes are either marked or unmarked (meaning that they do or don't have a mark - trick, cross, whatever).   The boxes (controls) are also either enabled or disabled to allow input (disabled ones are greyed out). The (underlying) variables they control are either set (true) or unset (false) and the boxes may be observed for their current state.  As far as I can tell, that provides precise information as to what we are talking about and gets around the "overloading" of the other terms to mean more than one of the options above.

I commend the above terminology to you all.


General Board / Re: Default Attribute Type in EA 15
« on: November 27, 2019, 09:37:47 am »
I wanted it set to none, as I would prefer to just manually type the attribute type. In previous editions of EA, it would highlight the "int" text, allowing for the text to be deleted quickly. In EA 15, it places the cursor after "int", meaning 3 backspaces are then needed to delete the text. Just slows the process really.
That sounds like a bug, certainly a very annoying 'enhancement'
They changed the way text boxes work on opening with values in them.  Bob is quite right, productivity has gone down noticeably since they made that change.  It's quite difficult now to select areas of the text box you want.  It's a general problem...


Uml Process / Re: Composition, Aggregation, EAUML and SPEM
« on: November 22, 2019, 10:37:02 am »
Well to paraphrase a regular contributor: as long as they keep it consistently inconsistent, I guess it is fine. Having said this, there is a limit to how much legacy can be kept without essentially making the tool produce something which is semantically incorrect/questionable.
Well, one benefit I've found of EA's self-inconsistency is that is EA stops me doing what I need to do via one path, I can usually find another path that WILL let me do it!

Your last statement exposes the fallacy of retaining the degree of legacy support we currently find in EA, the semantics of the kinds of models that are currently being attempted have moved on.  The discussion on instances is a case in point.

Nevertheless, it is theoretically possible to create a semantically valid output, by hiding the inconsistent parts.


General Board / Re: Relationhip matrix order with custom SQL
« on: November 22, 2019, 10:24:54 am »
I would like to propose an matrix improvement. (Irrespective of SQL)

I'd like to see a Don't Sort option, i.e., just list in the order the elements appear in the browser, with child elements indented.
 would also like to see a Frequency Sort option, i.e. the more relationships, the higher up and further to the left for an element. I have found this very useful in another tool.

- Håkan
Then, Håkan,
You'd better put in a feature request using one of the links at the bottom of the page.  If you do so, there is a theoretical possibility that your request may reach planet Sparx and be considered.  Without it, there is a non-zero, but a vanishingly small, possibility it might be considered.


Turns out it's not consistent.  For small selections, the diagrams get purged.  For larger ones, they don't (on my machine).  I've sent screenshots to Sparx.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 458