A.J.H. Simons and I. Graham. 30 things that go wrong in object modelling with UML. In Kilov H., Rumpe B. and Simmonds I. (ed.): Precise Behavioural Specification of Businesses and Systems (Chapter 17). Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
UML: A Survey Focused On Use Case Modeling - Chalkiadakis (Correct)
....been many arguments against the way use case modeling is employed by UML. Drawbacks of the technique have been identified in several papers; attempts to deal with the problems have also been presented in the literature. This subsection will present the problems that are mentioned in three papers [10, 26, 29] that focus on UML deficiencies, along with the answers given (when such answers are provided in these papers) At some points where solutions are not provided by the original authors, an attempt to address some of the critiques will be made. In addition, discussion on the critiques is provided, ....
....point of view. The loosely coupled collection of aspect models is a fundamental choice in UML, and is tightly bound to the semiformal nature of the language. 3.2.3 30 Things that Go Wrong in Object Modelling with UML 1.3 The paper 30 Things that Go Wrong in Object Modelling with UML 1. 3 [26] by Simons and Graham lists a catalogue of problems experienced by developers, using various object modeling techniques brought into prominence by the widespread adoption of UML standard notations. The problems that will be mentioned here are the ones that relate to use case modeling. First of ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
A.J.H. Simons and I. Graham. 30 things that go wrong in object modelling with UML. In Kilov H., Rumpe B. and Simmonds I. (ed.): Precise Behavioural Specification of Businesses and Systems (Chapter 17). Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
On the Compositional Properties of UML Statechart Diagrams - Simons (2000) (7 citations) (Correct)
....model incorporating a number of influences that cater for different modelling preferences. Some constructions are included which are redundant, some are convenient extensions to the basic state machine model and other constructions unwittingly undermine the formal tractability of state machines [16]. While redundant and syntactically sugared forms can always be converted back to canonical forms, we should be more concerned over violations of the semantics of automata and especially constructions which prevent hierarchical encapsulation of independent state machines. 2.1 Redundant ....
....in full. The path leading to a forking connector is simply expanded into as many paths as leave the fork; a symmetrical expansion is possible for joining connectors. Another extension is the admission of conditional guards, which are equivalent to a duplication in the number of control states [16]. Guards have the effect of introducing a certain arbitrariness into the chosen control logic. Figure 3a illustrates a temperature control system with hysteresis, in which temperature changes trigger events and timing constraints are expressed as a guards; this is reversed in figure 3b to show ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Simons A J H and Graham I. 30 things that go wrong in object modelling with UML. Chap. 17 in: Kilov H, Rumpe B and Simmonds I (ed) Precise Behavioral Specification of Businesses and Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC