On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Mark Fortner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The conversation raises an interesting point though. People tend to think > of UML in terms of the language they use. This makes me wonder whether it > might be possible to change the labels for checkboxes like "final", > "protected", etc to match the default language that the user selects.
Certainly it's possible. We use a similar concept on the diagrams where you can choose whether you'd like things displayed using UML notation or "Java" notation. The potential issue that I see with doing this is that there isn't a one-to-one mapping between the concepts of individual languages and UML concepts. This "impedance mismatch" isn't usually very big, but I think it's important to understand that it exists and that the concepts aren't the same. Doing things which obscure this fact will potentially come back to bite users in the end. One of the reasons that UML exists is to provide a "lingua franca" to enable communications between people who have different domain expertise. For this to work properly people really need understand enough about UML to be able to map their language and/or domain concepts onto it. Otherwise, you might as well just do your modeling using Java pseudocode (which is a perfectly valid modeling technique). Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
