Re-use of parts and relationships

[Hurra]

Hi!

I have modeled a system hierarchically with parts using UAF.



Each component has parts and the main system element re-use/inherit all the parts so one can browse the hierarchy of the system from the main element in the project browser.



What I have a problem dealing with is relationships. We don't always want a relation between to classifiers, since it some times are too general and simply not true. In those cases we make the connectors between the part-elements which are embedded in parts/IBDs.

The problem we're experiencing is that these connectors between part-elements is not inherited.

We build views for certain aspects of the functionality the system provide. Let's say text-based communication, the system covers both user client and server side hard- and software. The chat-view is supposed to show what parts provides for the chat and how they internally relates.

The view is simple to build with the Features & Properties tab, and insert elements from Parts/Properties. The problem with these inherited parts are, as I mentioned earlier, that no connectors/relationships are inherited.

Is this a bug or the way it supposed to be? How do we re-use relationships on re-used parts?

Hopefully you will understand my problem, otherwise I can provide snippets of diagrams/traceability-tab/project browser/...

Thank you in advance!

[Shegit Brahm]

Do I understand it correct that:

• you have a hierarchy of elements (example shows compositions only)
• there you have no problem that attribute of super element is visible in sub element
• then you have "normal" connectors = no hierarchy connectors like generalize/ specialize - is it a simple "association"?
• and your problem is, that if element A is connected "normal" to element B - you see no attribute from element A on element B?
• or your problem is, that if you put all relevant elements for a specific view ("chat") into a new diagram and you miss all "normal" connectors if there are sup elements connected "normal" to each other?

-> would it be possible to get a comparison to show which connections are visible and which are missing in "new view" while being present in "main view"?

[Hurra]

Do I understand it correct that:

• you have a hierarchy of elements (example shows compositions only)
• there you have no problem that attribute of super element is visible in sub element
• then you have "normal" connectors = no hierarchy connectors like generalize/ specialize - is it a simple "association"?
• and your problem is, that if element A is connected "normal" to element B - you see no attribute from element A on element B?
• or your problem is, that if you put all relevant elements for a specific view ("chat") into a new diagram and you miss all "normal" connectors if there are sup elements connected "normal" to each other?

-> would it be possible to get a comparison to show which connections are visible and which are missing in "new view" while being present in "main view"?

Thank you for your answer!

I see that I confuse more than clarify..

UAF framework:

ResourceArchitecture -- Association --> ResourceArtifact -- Association --> Software
I build this with a Resource-Structure diagram, first image.

ResourceArchitecture and ResourceArtifact get parts of stereotype ResourceRole.

This ResourceRole I relate to another ResourceRole according to:

ResourceRole -- Information Flow --> ResourceRole
I build this with a Resource -Structure or Resource-Connectivity diagram

What I am asking is, when I re-use/inherit this part (stereotype ResourceRole) I would like the information flow to show, inherited from the parts which are being re-used.

[Shegit Brahm]

sorry for giving maybe false hope, I myself have neither knowledge nor experience about UAF.
I was more hoping for a "rewording that induces possible design flaws on its own"

For a UML class/ object diagram it would look like the blue elements are instances of their specific class.
(key crtl pressed while dragged with mouse -> dialog opens)

And I assume, EA just offers information flows as a general connection type, I'm quite unsure if the UML would say this flow needs to be "inherited" by the object/ instance.