> honestly, i'm not sure why we're discussing then when a UML generating, > XML file format application already exists.
tools for expressing the model are only part of it. what Torvald is trying to point to here (Torvald: correct me if I'm wrong), is that using someone else's language makes more sense than creating one. if we chose a nomenclature for what we call things within the model that is already in use, it will be easier for others to understand what POE is doing and how it's built, and if that language happens to be UML then POE developers get some ready made tools to boot. -----Original Message----- From: sungo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 7:37 PM To: Erick Calder Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: UML On Friday, August 9, 2002, at 04:51 PM, Erick Calder wrote: > to POE developers it won't make any > difference whether they have to learn the UML or some other notation > (just > reiterating Torvald's point). and as was pointed out before, selecting > the > UML as the notation of choice will make Perl and POE more eligible > amongst > crowds that currently only work in C++/Java. Additionally, since design > tools already exist for UML the POE team's efforts to create tools will > reduce to modifying existing code. > > I do agree that UML is more than we need, but we don't have to use all > of > it. honestly, i'm not sure why we're discussing then when a UML generating, XML file format application already exists. http://omnigroup.com - see omnigraffle. It does UML, does pretty pictures, and uses XML as its main file format. seems to do everything everyone seems to want. ---- Matt Cashner [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://eekeek.org
