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 - PeterHeintz

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 58
Bugs and Issues / Re: State machine diagrams in EA 14 and 14.1
« on: September 19, 2018, 12:06:39 am »
I am also not happy with those changes, as I have stated in a post before. I have lots of SysML diagrams, and for SysML having a Frame is standard. Especially when having parameters in activities you need something anyway.
Over the years I used to put some context information on my diagrams as well. To clearly separate context information from the real stuff, I have the context outside of the frame.
Now I need to use some other mechanism to separate the real stuff from the context information. I am pretty sure, that I will find another solution, this is not the point, but the new solution causes me to review all my diagrams, regarding understandable layout, and if you have lots, you start thinking if it is worth to switch to a new version.
I get the feeling, that Sparx is trying to make EA more standard compliant and so it seem that adding new features is not the outshining focus any more (what would be good!).
For sure there are issues to address to make EA more complied with OMG. However regarding the inside/outside frame issue, the standard is not absolutely clear. But anyhow, I ask myself who gets a real benefit (not formal benefit like “I belief that it complies with OMG”) from this new solution.
I cannot see any benefit at all, but changing stuff lasting many years, typically have some impacts, and for me heavy bad impacts for nothing is not a good thing.

Hi Richard,
yes, due to the fact, that the UML specification is not always very precise in some areas one can come to this interpretation.
When using SysML, frames are standard. Both UML and SysML define frame names for different major diagram types (Class, Use Case, …). On the other hand both standards explicit allow having “mixed different kinds of diagram types” (whatever that exactly means).
The standard says nothing in such a mix, if a frame is allowed or not and if allowed how this should be handled. So, if nothing is defined, it is under the responsibility of the tool maker, to define a solution and the many years lasting solution is now changed.

For years, (in EA) the diagram was for me the whole pane what you see when you open the diagram. Now when you create a now diagram it is the pane you see, as long as there is no frame shown. If the frame is shown, it is not the pane anymore but the frame in the pane.
On the other hand when you link in a pane to another diagram, and you show that diagram as a frame your diagram is still the pane and not the frame. Just somehow odd.

My major issue is, that I have several standard SysML diagrams (having frame)  with some small amount of different type stuff.

Example: In activity diagrams it is hard to trace who catches a message sent and who might have sent a message catched.
In this cases when having a accept event message, I put the send signal messages defined somewhere else, outside the frame and connect send and accept by a trace relation.
This makes pretty clear what happens in the activity (what is in the frame) and what is just there to show relation to things outside (outside of the frame).
Now it is not possible to show this such explicit anymore and all those existing diagrams get grubby when updating to that version.

I know, due to other rendering changes on BDD’s, IBB’s, .. (e.g. compartment visibility), that I stitch to the point where I need to clean up almost any diagram after updating from V13 to V14.x. And when you have over thousand diagrams affected this issue becomes a show stopper.

Hi Richard,
what do you mean?
Do you mean, that if you have diagram frames, all stuff must be in the frame according UML2.5 or elements can be outside the frame as well?

Suggestions and Requests / Re: search via sql
« on: September 05, 2018, 04:37:39 pm »
When opening the link, I get a message that it is deleted.

Bugs and Issues / Re: WebEA: Worker diagram rendering different than client
« on: September 05, 2018, 12:08:55 am »
I have not jet webea and the worker productive, but unfortunately since some time, each EA version renders more and more differently for whatever reason.
So the root cause might be, that you are using different versions (client<->worker).

This rendering hell makes updates more and more a nightmare.
And if I am right, using webea in future will cause some more rendering problems to me.

Up to now I did some trace relations of elements „really“ belonging to a diagram to elements “really" belonging to something else. To make clear what “really” belongs to the diagram, I put those elements in the diagram frame. The stuff those elements traces too, I put sometimes on the diagram as well but outside of the frame.
Why is this not possible any more after so many years?

Hi Hurra,
BDDs and IBDs have their root in UML. BDD ~ Class Diagram and IBD ~ Composit Structure Diagrams.

The BDD you can somehow regard as a structured bill of material, it focuses on what a thing consist of.

IBD focuses on how the different things within a thing interact with each other.

Let’s say you have a block representing a special kind of wheel. This wheel will be part of a car type A typically with multiplicity 4. Further on this wheel could be part of many other car types.

If you want to express how wheels interact e.g. with the power train, you need to differentiate the four wheels somehow like left-font, right-rear,…, and these are the “instances” or more correct in SysML "the right-front wheel is a property of car type A with the role to be the right front wheel of type "Wheel".

If you would only use BDD you would need to duplicate the "Wheel Types" (Blocks) as many times as wheels you have. The wheel block could even be a complex thing (wheel rim, tire, valve,…), you would need to double as well. In other words BDD and IBD is all about OO in SysML.

General Board / Re: History of lock/unlock
« on: August 09, 2018, 11:59:28 pm »
Just wondering why you need that EA log stuff at all, because as I remember you are using PTC Integrity for versioning.

If you have version controlled packages, the users must lock the package against the version control system, and the information who changed what when you should get from you VCN in use.

Ok I got it!
Thank you KP!

It is amazing to see, how capable you are, in beaming back your users in newbe stage with each new major version. ;)

General Board / Re: Warning message that object is NOT unique
« on: August 08, 2018, 11:06:10 pm »
In a fist step I would run a Project Integrety check.

IBD seem not to have this problem (only BDD).

On my next try to bring V14 in production, I got the following problem.
When I have a block diagram created with V13 showing the ports on the bock borders, and I move the block a bit to another place, ports on the left and right border are displaced.
Ports on the left are outside of the bock and ports on the right are inside of the block.

Yes, Tagged Values are intended to extend too what is not there, but this stuff is already there at least for use cases. So, no need to use tagged values.

When looking to buid 1423 to see if the bock/port issues are gone, I realized that in V14 it is only possible to set the port type on a bock border rendered port.
This is quiet indirect and in pre V14 it was possible to do that without putting the port to a diagram.

So, please provide the Advance/Set Property Type… on project browser again and in addition in the Parts/Properties/Interaction Points.

Bugs and Issues / Re: WebEA Worker not Working?
« on: August 08, 2018, 04:23:54 pm »
I have not jet verified. However according Sparx this is fixed with Pro Cloud Server Version 2.1.21.
So quick! :) :) :)

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 58