Oh, I didn't answer you first question. I'll be developing this initially just for the UML2 activity diagram.
Bob On 12 April 2011 11:13, Bob Tarling <[email protected]> wrote: > Thomas said: >> One question on NotatedItem: what if the fig is not associated with a >> metatype, but with just an >> attribute of a metatype? > > That is where the NotationType enumeration comes in. Both the metatype > and notation type are supplied. > > Mostly the notation type will be NAME but as an example for an > AssociationEnd there will be a NAME and a MULTIPLICITY > > Bob > > On 12 April 2011 10:59, Thomas Neustupny <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Bob, >> >> moving notation code to modules with the architecture you proposed and >> thereby minimize the notation related events is great. Let's see how things >> work when you try it for a new diagram type. Which one are you thinking of? >> >> One question on NotatedItem: what if the fig is not associated with a >> metatype, but with just an attribute of a metatype? >> >> Thomas >> >> -------- Original-Nachricht -------- >>> Datum: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 20:30:18 +0100 >>> Von: Bob Tarling <[email protected]> >>> An: [email protected] >>> Betreff: Re: [argouml-dev] Moving UML2 activity diagrams forward >> >>> Hi Mark >>> >>> Notations are nothing new, it is just this implementation that is new. >>> >>> Try selecting File->Notations->Java and dropping some classes on a >>> diagram. >>> >>> However what we don't currently have are notations implemented for the >>> new UML2 diagrams. >>> >>> There has been talk of refactoring the notations for some time but I'd >>> prefer to implement a brand new diagram based on fresh principles and >>> not waiting for the refactoring to catch up. >>> >>> The problem many Figs have at the comment is that they redraw too >>> frequently partly because they listen to far too many things or redraw >>> completely instead of only partly redrawing.. >>> >>> With these new diagrams I'm trying to get a better architecture so >>> that Fig listen to the minimum they need to. For that the notations >>> also need to fire less. >>> >>> If I can prove this method for a new diagram type then there is no >>> chance of me breaking the notation in the process for our existing >>> diagrams. >>> >>> As other diagrams begin to become modules of their own they can >>> migrate at that stage to the new notation system. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7 April 2011 17:37, Mark Fortner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Hi Bob, >>> > Just to be clear, this framework is meant to store the information about >>> the >>> > items in the diagram >>> > (typically the data that we currently find in the XMI file) is that >>> right? >>> > And would there still be the same degree of correspondence between the >>> > diagrams and the >>> > XMI file that exists today? By that I mean that if we see a Fig whose >>> ID is >>> > 123 then the >>> > XMI file will also contain an item whose ID is 123? >>> > You describe the NotationLanguage interface as "The interface that any >>> > notation languages should >>> > implement (e.g. UML, Java etc)." I assume that the NotationLanguage >>> for >>> > Java would mean >>> > some Java-specific notation like perhaps "annotations" like >>> > "@PostInitialization" or "@Test". >>> > Is that correct? >>> > How would NotationLanguages be registered with the NotationUtility? >>> Would >>> > this be through the >>> > Services API (or some other discovery mechanism), or hard-coded? >>> > Regards, >>> > Mark >>> > >>> > On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Bob Tarling <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> For UML2 activity diagrams I halted for a while thinking about how to >>> >> apply notations. I think the notations are an incredibly important >>> >> subsystem as they remove knowledge of both GEF and so will help with >>> >> any move to a different diagram implementation should it be required >>> >> in future. >>> >> >>> >> I have prepared something on the wiki regarding how I would like to >>> >> see notations split out into its own module and improved - >>> >> http://argouml.tigris.org/wiki/Notation_Architecture >>> >> >>> >> I'd appreciate any feedback. >>> >> >>> >> I propose to leave the old notation architecture in place while this >>> >> is developed for the UML2 activity diagram only. >>> >> >>> >> Once this is working I'll move the state diagram forward to a similar >>> >> level of functionality and move any common code for state and activity >>> >> into another shared module. >>> >> >>> >> Regards >>> >> >>> >> Bob >>> >> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2717692 >>> >> >>> >> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: >>> >> [[email protected]]. >>> >> To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, >>> >> email: [[email protected]] >>> > >>> > >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2717786 >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: >>> [[email protected]]. >>> To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, >>> email: [[email protected]] >> >> -- >> Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir >> belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de >> >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2719047 >> >> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: >> [[email protected]]. >> To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email: >> [[email protected]] >> > ------------------------------------------------------ http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=2719051 To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]]. To be allowed to post to the list contact the mailing list moderator, email: [[email protected]]
