| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Multi Valued Interface Models?
x wrote:
> dawn wrote:
>>x wrote:
>>>You have not shown a complete model of the interface.
>>A complete model? Maybe we need to look at what a model is. A model >>is a metaphor or a, well, model of the real thing. It is not the real >>thing. A model car doesn't usually have a working engine. It might >>not have working brakes or even any brakes.
>>>HTML and XML are not UML. >>>I don't think UML is generally acceptable. >> >>Nothing is completely acceptable everywhere. Prototypes might come as >>close as possible to be generally acceptable, but you always get >>comments about how it is not a "complete prototype" which I gather >>would be, well, the final product. What diagramming specification is >>more commonly accepted than UML? That is not a rhetorical question. >>I'd be happy to use something else for showing a diagram of a logical >>model of data.
Which is a common misconception due to sloppy wording.
> And you have not given :
> -Use-case diagrams
> - Class diagrams
> - State-machine diagrams
> - Message-trace diagrams
> - Object-message diagrams
> - Process diagrams
> - Module diagrams
> -Platform diagrams
> so I don't know if you have given an UML model after all.
Strictly, there is no such thing as a UML model.
You can think of a model, and describe it using expressions from your modelling language. It's hard to communicate about models when everybody uses different languages to express similar things. Booch, Rumbaugh and Jacobson did a very good thing to come up with a language acceptable to many different schools.
Now think of a model, use the UML to express aspects of it. If somebody would say "where is the UML model?" - you still would understand, no? Received on Mon Feb 13 2006 - 08:17:55 CST
![]() |
![]() |