Monday, January 17, 2005

More UML

When I blogged the other day about the reason for confusion the two students had with UML was because of not having followed a formal process of collecting and analysing requirements. I was right.

It was on Friday evening when I met them at my office. They showed me their use cases, sequence diagrams drawn using MS Word! and a lot of other documents. The use cases were lengthy and often didn't make sense and included system design and ran into several pages. Some of the actors in the document had a limb missing (handicapped!) . Growing tired of it I finally gave these two a crasch course in OOAD and UML in 60 minutes and asked them to come back with the use cases.

Its a pity why people have a notion that UML is complex. Infact its probably one notation that provides syntax to capture most modelling decisions. Its also a wrong notion to expect UML or any of the tools that support UML like IBM Rational Rose or Together J to solve your modelling problems. Just like brush and paint do not create a picture; Rose and UML can't create a model. The artist or modeller should supply the thought. Hope you get the picture! Maybe someday I'll post a few steps on how to model software systems.

No comments: