Re: [soa-rm] On UML

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

My thoughts on UML and Concepts Maps are that it is best to start with 
the simplest presentation (Concept map) and see if we have a firm need 
for UML.  A concept map often groups many things that may not appear in 
the same UML diagram which often make them easier to grok than UML.

The position paper Matt and I submitted uses the concept maps that we 
used in the W3C Web Services Architecture document.  Concept maps are 
easy to compose, however they can also be the death of a standard since 
they are often very open ended.  It is very easy to keep adding concepts 
until you get something that looks like the large concept map in the W3C 
WSAG Technical Note.  UML, by comparison, is far more strict however 
leads to multiple views of the same things in attempts to relay 
information about them.

I encourage everyone to read the 3 different submissions so far into the 
group to see how the concept/mind maps work and analyze how they can 
also be open ended.

Some basic modelling conventions for keeping things simple are to use no 
more than 5-6 concepts per model, then layer the more technical aspects 
in UML.  You can use concept maps and UML to show architectural patterns 
too.

Let's start with concept/mind maps to model "what" we are going to be 
dealing with, then delve into whether or not we need UML based on that.

Duane


-- 
***********
Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources  - http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html
***********