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 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58
Ok! Thank you!
Just I wanted to be sure that there is no low effort solution.
I will go the MDG way.

General Board / Re: Usage of document Meta Data in document templates
« on: February 29, 2016, 07:23:23 pm »
Hello RoyC,
these report constants I already use in my EA V12, but I need some further information like department name, document type, verifier,... These data I could put as tagged values to my document root package, but I have no way to access that data e.g. in headers, footers. Just a way to access tagged values as Report Constants would be a way to solve my problem.

Hello Glassboy,
I do not have a problem in where to put my meta data to, I have a problem in putting my meta data on cover pages or headers and footers. Do you have a way how I can put the meta data from the "class element" to a header, footer, cover page?

General Board / Usage of document Meta Data in document templates
« on: February 27, 2016, 04:27:12 am »
I work in an environment where nice pretty and formal documents are required.

These documents need some meta data (project name, project number, document number,….). These data is either project specific or document specific and must go to the cover page or header/footer.
All my project specific data I put in Project Constants. When defining document templates I can use those constants on cover page or header and footer (all fine).

The problem I have is with the document specific data. This data I could hold as tagged values in a package. But I find no way how to access those tagged values because I need to be in the package or I would need a custom query, but none of both I can use in cover page nor in header/footer.
Any idea?

Hello Geert
I have already profiles packed in a MDG technology which e.g. introduces a non SysML requirements management language.

I am looking on something that is “cheaper” (low effort).
With uml profile a cheap solution would be, just to define a stereotype which I could use for anything. But I look as well for a solution where I can mark quick anything without treating each of “anything” (classes, activities, ....) individually.

General Board / Re: ModelView column width
« on: February 27, 2016, 03:35:00 am »
I have no columns in my model views at all.
It is just a tree!

General Board / Re: Baselines
« on: February 27, 2016, 03:28:03 am »
What do you mean with how to manage package baselines?
What menu items you have to press, or what are package baselines typically used for and on which package level,…?

I have some kind of model library that is intended to be used in other EA repositories.

Basically several user will create content for this model libraries.

The users who use the libraries will import those libraries somehow to their model and use the library more or less as read only elements.

I think it would be good, when the users would be able to quickly find out (e.g. when looking on their diagrams) whether an element belongs to their own work or when it just is a library element or is classified by an element coming from the library.

Currently I belief I should stereotype all that library elements manually or by a script before distribution. So I would be able to define in addition, some visual effects on those elements.
Do any of you, have some better ideas how to achieve such an indication with low effort, maybe even working when the library element is used as an classifier in a project using the library?

General Board / Re: Mapping an activity to its structured activity
« on: February 27, 2016, 12:14:44 am »
Yes you can do that!
Just use the Relationship Matrix under Tools.

There you have to select as source and target the “root” package where all you activities and actions are. Further on you have to select the link type and the direction you want to us.
Doing that you can click on the matrix to establish, delete or just to check what links are there.

However the matrix might contradict to the classifiers you have chosen in your action calls because nobody than you will check if the matrix and your action calls fit together.

If you just want to find out where an activity is called by which action use Traceability under “View” (do not forget to select the “Classifier” option). This view is maybe not very user friendly but it will give you the answer.

Bugs and Issues / Re: Lateral Horizontal/Vertical connector style
« on: February 26, 2016, 08:32:11 pm »
From my experience, when you relate A (source) to B (destination) in very most cases:
-Lateral Vertical means; line goes vertical from destination and horizontal from source
-Lateral Horizontal means line goes horizontal from destination and vertical from source

This is just the opposite of what I expected some time ago.
But some years ago I realized that drawing most of these UML relations need to be drawn in opposite of what I expected as well.

And opposite * opposite is fine for me.

I analyze my problem by stepping though my various fragments and came the conclusion that the problem is not EA but the EA user (me).
Just ignore this issue!

My document templates work as I expect as long I do not have more than one diagram under an element.

Example: When I have one SysML IBD under a Block all works fine, but when I have two IBD diagrams, both diagrams are rendered twice.
Any idea about a workaround?

I tried to do this as well, without success.
I would also be interested in a way this could be done.

Bugs and Issues / Re: Lateral Horizontal/Vertical connector style
« on: February 18, 2016, 02:16:29 am »
I use the lateral style quiet frequently, maybe just because of my style arranging things.
Anyhow you are right, there is some mess in behavior which might be random or depend on something I do not understand.
By instinct I managed to choose in most cases the right type and if not I just press the other lateral option. Maybe not nice but this works for me.

I have several potential use cases that would fit to the Decision Table feature.
However I do not use it, because it is so limited by just allowing appending rows.

Adding the possibility to insert rows before existing rows or move existing row, is really a basic feature, which is from my point of view the minimum the make Decision Tables usable at all.

As an example I have use cases which are made more precise e.g. by activities, sequences or state machines.

To maintain the relation between the use cases the concretization I use the traceability matrix feature, but I need several of those, depending on the modeling language I have chosen for the concretization.

Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58