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.


Topics - Geert Bellekens

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 22
31
Bugs and Issues / Searches package empty in resources window
« on: August 28, 2020, 05:21:07 pm »
V15.2 has this great new feature where you can see the contents of an MDG technology.
If you have searches in the (model) MDG however this package always looks empty. The searches are not listed.

(I just verified, the searches are still available to be used, no worries there)

Reported

Geert

32
Bugs and Issues / Tagged value default is applied wrong
« on: July 02, 2020, 04:55:23 pm »
Details:
I'm working on a UML profile that has a stereotype redefining ArchiMate3::ApplicationComponent
In this stereotype I have added a tagged value named "Domain" with no default value.

In the model I'm using the MDG in (not in the development model) I have a tagged value type definition for a tag with the name "Domain" as well, specified like this:

Type=String;
AppliesTo=UseCase;
Default=CMS;

Now when I create a new element with my stereotype, the default of the model tagged value is applied to my MDG tagged value, so they all get "CMS" as default value.


Steps to Reproduce:
- create a model tagged value definition with the same name as an MDG tagged value
- set a default value in the definition
- notice that the default value is applied to the MDG tagged value

Reported

Geert

33
I'm working on an MDG model and I'm trying to implement a bunch of rules for relationship between the different stereotypes.

In this case I wanted to say that my stereotype can be related to a plain UML Class using a dependency.
This works, but the problem is that it also allows a dependency to all possible subtypes of Class, including Components, and stereotyped Components.
This sort of defeats the point of having constraints, as most of the stereotypes I'm dealing with in this profile are derived from Class or Component.

Is there any way to say I want to allow a Dependency to UML class only, not to one of its derived entities?

Very similar to this. If I put Dependency in the metaclass tag of my metarelationship, I'm automatically getting Abstraction and Realization as well, as these are subtypes of Dependency. Is there any way to allow only Dependency, and not Abstraction and Realization?

Thanks

Geert

34
Details:

If you want to save an attribute constraint containing a single quote, and there is already one with the same name, EA crashes hard.

Steps to reproduce
- Create attribute constraint with name "constraint'" and save
- Create a new attribute constraint on the same attribute, with the same name
- Click on save
- EA then first asks you if you want to overwrite the existing one, but hen comes back with an SQL exception and finally crashes.

Reported

Geert

35
I'm working on an MDG for a client, and they are supposed to be able to maintain it later on.

So from time to time I will be making adjustments (say create new stereotypes), and sometimes they will make adjustments themselves (change document generation templates)

The problem is that a lot of the path involved in this process are absolute paths.
- All of the icon paths in the stereotypes
- The file paths for the different UML profiles in the .MTS

Has anyone already solved this problem?
I was thinking to write a little script (what else ;D) to do a mass change of all the absolute paths for both icons and the MTS, but I don't wanna be reinventing the wheel. (or the hot water as we say here)

Geert

36
Hi,

I'm doing a profile where I have a stereotype extending Attribute.
Now a was looking at the meta-constraint hoping to constraint the allowed type and owner for this stereotype.

I did the following
https://imgur.com/vcyyF2D


But neither one of these meta-constraints seem to do anything. I can add «SAP_alternativeKey» attributes to any type of element, and I can set any classifier as the type of my attribute, not only Classes.
Did I miss something?
Was I expecting too much?
What is the point of "umlrole=type" if not for attributes?

Geert

37
Bugs and Issues / shapescripts on Class don't work
« on: May 30, 2020, 12:00:48 am »
I'm having a very weird issue with shapescripts.

I have a stereotype that extends Class.
On this stereotype I have defined a shapescript.

When I import my MDG and use this stereotype, I don't see the shapescript, it's just the default class shape.
I tried changing the shapescript, and using existing shapescripts that I know to be working but nothing seems to work.

When I extend my stereotype from Activity it works perfectly fine.

Trying to investigate further I even copied and pasted the whole <stereotype> part from ArchiMate3::BusinessActor in my MDG and changed the name to my stereotype name, but that didn't help either. I get the icon, and the background color, but not the shapescript.
(From ArchiMate3 this works just fine)

I have been breaking my head about this for more than an hour now.  :-\

Anyone have an idea what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks

Geert

38
I've been doing some work automating some of the stuff I do with UML profiles and MDG's

I now have a little script that generates my profiles, and then also generates the MDG technology; so far so good.

Now the next step is to import that MDG file into my model, and it looks like they thought of that as well. I found the operation Repository.ImportTechnology, which takes an xml string as parameter.
But when I tried that, it didn't overwrite my existing model MDG as I expected, it created a new MDG in the model in a way I couldn't do manually.
Underneath the MDG in the resources window I saw a package for patterns, a package for profiles, and one for code engineering, and in the "manage MDG technologies" the location of the MDG was not "model", but "project"

The documentation does mention something that it is related to pre-version 7 technologies, so maybe this is some very old forgotten relic from ye olde days?

Anyways, I'm still looking for a way to import an MDG file into a model with a script. Anyone happen to know if that is possible (and if so, how)?

Thanks

Geert

39
I was working on some VBA code in excel and found some operations on EA.Package that I didn't recognize
  • GetTXAlias (txCode as String, nFlag as Long)
  • GetTXName (txCode as String, nFlag as Long)
  • GetTXNote (txCode as String, nFlag as Long)

Went to the documentation, but I can't find anything on those operations.
Anyone know what these do, and why they are not documented?

Geert

40
Bugs and Issues / Quicklink broken
« on: May 28, 2020, 12:06:11 am »
I'm having a weird issue today.

For some reason the quicklink seems to be broken.
I only get the standard Dependency, Trace and Information Flow when I try to link most types of element (Class -> Class, Action -> Action,...)
Only ArchiMate3 items don't seem to be affected.

I tried this in several different models, and they all behave the same.
I have turned the "Filter to toolbox" on and off, but that doesn't make a difference.

Anyone an idea what I might have done wrong?

Version is 15.1.1528

Geert

41
We have a script that creates «master document» packages for document generation.
This has been working for us until we decided to review the user permissions.
We removed the permission "Configure Stereotype" from the regular users as they are not supposed to create or modify stereotypes.
After this change, when our users ran the script to create the virtual document, the created package didn't get the «master document» stereotype.
Adding the permission "configure stereotypes" resolved the issue.

The relevant code we use to create the virtual document:

Code: [Select]
dim masterDocumentPackage as EA.Package
set masterDocumentPackage = ownerPackage.Packages.AddNew(documentName, "package")
masterDocumentPackage.Update
masterDocumentPackage.StereotypeEx = "EAUML::master document"
masterDocumentPackage.Alias = domainName
masterDocumentPackage.Update

Reported

Geert

42
General Board / Practical way to do reviews
« on: May 21, 2020, 11:34:37 pm »
One of my tasks at a client is to perform model reviews.
The goal is to increase the quality and consistency of the model

The general idea is that every week or so, I look at the subjects that have been recently worked on. I then choose a subject and make an in-depth review.

One of the tools I'll be using is the EA Validator add-in we made. This add-in contains a bunch of "syntax" rules such a
- A BPMN business process must have a composite diagram
- A BPMN Activity may only be used on one diagram
- A BPMN Pool must have a valid PartnerRole, PartnerEntity or ProcessRef tagged value.

I run the validator, and if any error still pop up that will be a remark for that subject.

But of course the validator rules don't cover everything.
Some rules haven't been written yet, or might even never get written because the occurrence of such an error is deemed too low.
Other rules are more semantic in nature and cannot be formalized as an EA Validator rule.

So at the end of my review I'll have a bunch of remarks regarding the subject. Most of those remarks will be related to one or more things in the model.

So what I'm now looking for is a practical way to store and share these review remarks.
I have been looking in the manual to figure out what EA has to offer in that area and I found

Formal review: https://sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/15.2/team_support/formal_review_elements.html
The problem I have with these is that it's going to take me a massive amount of time to register each item in the review, add a review to that element. It just doesn't seem practical at all.

Reviewing Elements: https://www.sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/15.1/modeling/specification_review.html
Feels a bit similar to the formal review.

Reviews https://www.sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/15.1/guidebooks/tech_reviews.html
I'm not sure how this fits in, but it doesn't seem practical at all.

Maintenance https://www.sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/15.1/project_management/maintenancesupport.html
So maybe I can add issues to elements? That seems to be promising. It has text field, a status field and priority, resolver and resolved date.
But to my surprise the Resolved Date is automatically filled in with today's date, and the resolver is filled with my username.
Now I can remove the resolver, but I can't remove the resolved date.

I don't understand. Who thought it would be a good idea for an issue to automatically fill in the resolved date? I'm not creating issues that are already resolved, I'm creating issues because they still need to be resolved.

You can apparently also doubleclick on such an issue, and then you have the possibility to clear the resolved date. Looks fine in the popup dialog, but when it comes back to the list, it shows 30-12-1899 as resolved date. ???
sigh...

Currently I'm thinking along the lines of using excel to store my review instead of one of the many review tools available in EA.
Too bad, because then I'll probably want to add a button or hyperlink to select the element in the project browser in EA, because that where the element needs to be fixed, and before you know it this because a whole new application itself :(

So I'm asking if anyone has some useful experience to share, doing this type of reviews in EA?

Thanks

Geert


43
Bugs and Issues / Creating trace relations with API broken in v15.1
« on: May 13, 2020, 04:09:51 pm »
I have a script that creates traces between use cases and classes.
The code to create this specific trace is

Code: [Select]
function linkElementsWithAutomaticTrace(sourceElement, targetID)
dim trace as EA.Connector
set trace = sourceElement.Connectors.AddNew("","trace")
trace.Alias = "automatic"
trace.SupplierID = targetID
trace.Update
end function

In version 12.1 this creates a connector with ConnectorType "Abstraction" and stereotype "trace"
In version 15.1 this same code creates a connector with ConnectorType "Dependency" and stereotype "trace".

Manual creation of a trace relation creates connector of type "Abstraction" and stereotype "trace"

Conclusion: creating the connector via the API is broken in v15.1

Reported

Geert

44
Bugs and Issues / Tagged values not visible in docked window
« on: April 22, 2020, 06:33:14 pm »
In some cases the tagged values of an element are not visible in the docked window and can only be seen in the popup dialog.
This seems to happen when the assigned stereotype is not fully qualified.
Example: element stereotype set to «model document», not EAUML::model document
The tagged values corresponding to the EAUML::model document are not shown in either the properties or the tags section of the docked properties window.

I can understand that the new method requires a fully qualified stereotype before showing tags in the properties section, but if tagged values are present they should be shown in in the properties section (fully qualified stereotype), or in the tags section (not fully qualified)

Reported

Geert

45
When you add something in the notes of a BPMN 2.0 Business Process in the template package, these notes are not copied to new BPMN Business processes as supposed to.
This works perfectly with any other type that I tested from UML, ArchiMate, BPMN, but not with BPMN Business processes.
For some reason the BPMN Business processes are an exception here.


Steps to Reproduce:
- Add a BPMN 2.0 Business process to the project template package
- fill in the notes of this business process
- create a new BPMN business process somewhere else in the model
- note that the notes of this new BPMN business process are not copied from the one in the template package.

Reported

Geert

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 22