|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
|
2008/02/09 16:01
|
|
|
|
|
Hi everybody.
First time here. I'm Andrea, SE student at Genoa University (Italy).
I'm preparing to attend a Software Engineering exam, and one main requisite is that we're able to use and manage UML diagrams.
I've got a simple (i hope) question for you, which's making me trouble: How shall I decide wether to use Activity or Sequence or State Machine diagrams to model something?
I mean, I know each diagram characteristics, but I feel like they're quite similar, and are able to express same concepts.
I hope someone will suggest me some kind of criteria to decide (eg: model the 'typical life' of an object, model some sort of interaction between different objects, etc.)
Thanks everybody who's going to reply something.
|
|
|
|
 |
| |
|
|
2008/02/10 01:46
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's a pleasure to deal which such active and non-spammed forums
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
2008/03/23 13:59
|
|
|
Robert326
Joined: 2008/03/21
Messages: 2
Offline
|
|
|
|
I am no expert as I have been working on UML modeling for about 1 month. For me, Activity diagrams are most value when you are in the early stages of development. Sometimes, you must describe what *should* happen, NOT what will make it happen. If you are to describe how the system should act, I found that user diagrams and then activity diagrams are the first two.
I find that sequence diagrams require you to describe the interactions between components that you haven't designed yet. So, they eventually will be valuable, but I think they describe "how does the system perform the operations defined in the activity diagram".
Another aspect I observed is that UML modeling is extremely iterative. Ideas are proposed, tested, and refined.
I would appreciate other's feedback as well. Hope your exams went well.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
