Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
General Board / Re: Element to attribute relationship in Matrix
« Last post by Modesto Vega on November 11, 2019, 08:51:02 pm »
The feature matrix as per build v15.0.1513 (Build 1513) allows you to create a matrix between 2 elements, on one element you could specify operations and on the other attributes.

There are a number of limitations:
  • It is an element to element matrix, unfortunately you cannot choose all elements in a package
  • It works well for Class elements, but it does not work for any element that does not have attributes, operations or receptions
P.S.: Not sure what receptions means in this context, I will need to decipher https://sparxsystems.com/enterprise_architect_user_guide/14.0/model_domains/reception.html.
22
General Board / unique stereotypes names in one profile?
« Last post by Palm on November 11, 2019, 08:46:09 pm »
Do stereotypes need to have unique names in one profile?
I developed a UML profile and associated MDG for class diagrams with multiple metaclasses and related stereotypes with the same name. The stereotype is called <<Choice>> and is defined three times. But each time as an extension of a different UML metaclass. One <<Choice>> as extension of (EA)UML-attribute, another one as (EA)UML-Class and one as extension of (EA)UML-Association. Sofar so good. Though I was a little bit surprised that metaclasses with the same name could be included in one metaclass diagram.

However the generated UML-profile and the MDG include only one of the Choice stereotypes. So it seems that stereotype names need to be unique in one UML profile. My question: Do stereotype names need to be unique in one profile? And if so. Is there a shortcut to overcome this?

Thanks for any advice.
23
Yes indeed. You can't do

Dim e As New EA.Element

You have to do something like

Dim e as EA.Element
set e = myPackage.Elements.AddNew("elementName", "Class")


Geert
24
General Board / Re: Where did "instance" go?
« Last post by Paolo F Cantoni on November 11, 2019, 04:19:10 pm »
many pedants here would say I'm an absolute pedant 

"Absolute" in the sense of undiminished, independent of other things, or a pedant for things that are themselves absolutes?
Would you accept Both;)

And to illustrate that... What do you understand by: "a specialization relationship is always allowed between two instances of the same element".

Is BMW X3 a specialization of BMW X1 - surely not?  Can there be a specialization of BMW X1 with Vin#?  Where is the element?  What is the Element?  Is it a metatype?  Why do Actors "get a guernsey" as an Element, but Motor Vehicles don't?

Thoughts?
Paolo
25
General Board / Re: Where did "instance" go?
« Last post by Rhys Lewis 2 on November 11, 2019, 11:34:00 am »
many pedants here would say I'm an absolute pedant 

"Absolute" in the sense of undiminished, independent of other things, or a pedant for things that are themselves absolutes?
26
General Board / Re: Where did "instance" go?
« Last post by Paolo F Cantoni on November 11, 2019, 11:17:04 am »
Ah... My Apologies... As you probably have realised, I'm somewhat of a pedant (many pedants here would say I'm an absolute pedant  ;)).  But hey, "Let's hear it for pedantry!"  ;D

Child Generalization and Child (Generalization), aren't the same thing and Sparx has helpfully added to the confusion by making the link generate a non-ArchiMate term (Generalization)  The term is used EXACTLY once in the standard and then ONLY to point out that the ArchiMate concept is Specialization (and I suspect to give UML a "Serve" for defining Generalization the wrong way round).

Anyway, now I understand and I agree that (as the Standard says) "a specialization relationship is always allowed between two instances of the same element".

This thread has REALLY got me thinking about the nature of instances and as you said, it's the lifeblood of this thread.

I'm still refining my thoughts (while tryng to get on with my day job).  Hopefully, I'll have some input soon.

Paolo
27
General Board / Re: Where did "instance" go?
« Last post by Rhys Lewis 2 on November 11, 2019, 10:37:53 am »
I'll bite.  What's a "Child Generalization"?  In normal modelling usage, that would be an oxymoron.  Generalization is a directed relationship from the origin (so-called child) to the destination (so-called parent).  Specialization is the antonym of Generalization and therefore directed from the more general to the more specific.

That really is the life blood of this thread.  On the one hand is the canonical forms suggested by the Archimate standard, and on the other is the things that actually happen when you drag Archimate objects from the project browser onto a diagram.

As it stands, if I drag an Archimate technology object (Node, Device, Equipment etc.) onto a diagram I have two choices: Link (ie. put the existing one onto the diagram) or "Child (Generalization)", which is the only way to create a relationship from the existing object to the new thing that is to be represented on the diagram. 

I suppose that another way around the problem would be drag the first object onto the diagram, create a new object of a suitable type, then connect them with a relationship from Toolbox, then remove the first object from the diagram.  However this won't visually embed the relationship in the new object.

Which returns me to my original question, "Where did "instance" go?"
28
Bugs and Issues / Re: Shapescript can't draw correctly
« Last post by qwerty on November 11, 2019, 10:34:45 am »
Yeah, I have a collection of weirdnesses in the book. I might add that one too...

q.
29
Automation Interface, Add-Ins and Tools / Re: Difficulty deploying Interop.EA.dll
« Last post by qwerty on November 11, 2019, 10:33:23 am »
In other words:
Code: [Select]
element = package.elements.addNew("MyOwnClassName", "Class")
will create a new element in the package's elements collection. (You need to translate that into that VB talk yourself)

q.
30
Bugs and Issues / Re: Shapescript can't draw correctly
« Last post by Paolo F Cantoni on November 11, 2019, 10:33:11 am »
Been there, done that, bought the book.  Actually I haven't bought your shapescript book, but it should mention that drawing ellipses in shapescripts is problematic

I've encountered many such issues.  I just keep fiddling until the output on the screen looks right.  As you change the zoom, that can also muck things up and other shapes aren't immune either.

Sympathy,
Paolo
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10