Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Reply to message

* = Required fields
* Subject
* Body
Send reply to
Author (directly in email)
Please type the letters in the image above.

Original message

Author Alex Bagehot <alex@bagehot.net>
Full name Alex Bagehot <alex@bagehot.net>
Date 2003-05-20 06:45:51 PDT
Message I seem to have made a mistake in that it isn't xmi-di but more uml-di.

I have copied this email to the address given in the proposal. I hope
that someone at Gentleware would find this discussion interesting. I
guess most of the points here would have been discussed as part of
writing the proposal itself so it may seem trivial.

The downsides:

 From reading the proposal, all the diagram details are saved as
'properties' in the uml-di model. That confirms your fear that it is
another standard.

But then the immediate question that pops into my head is what is JGX
(maybe its not fair(/like-with-like) to compare JGX with uml-di?)?
You'll have to forgive me I haven't read up on what is exactly saved in
the JGraphPad file format, but it seems to save the graphmodel and
presentation info (below).

"The first section is a
textual representation of the graphmodel and its group-structure. The
second and third
sections are referenced by the cells in the first part, they hold the
userObjects and
attributes respectively."

[ArgoUml saves pgml. Each group is assigned a unique id which is also
stored in the model, thus providing the link for save/load. the other
major difference is that ArgoUml doesn't use ports. there are other

(i'm not commenting on whether any approach is good or bad) Like you I
am trying to keep an open mind.

I am trying to brainstorm ideas, so I expect to get things wrong. Put it
another way, it is cheaper to make a mess of proposals, suggestions,
ideas now than later when designs are made and code committed.


Michael Lawley wrote:
> Alex Bagehot wrote:
>>what do you think of the xmi diagram interchange proposal from gentleware?
>>is it better for frameworks like GEF and JGraph to provide support for
>>that rather than focussing on mof or emf?
>>It would seem to me to be yes.
> I don't have a strong feeling on this one, but I would tend toward an
> approach that embedded SVG with the model using namespaces.
> The advantage of using a diagram model such as Gentleware et al propose
> is that you can leverage MOF/EMF to get both XMI for your domain model
> and for the diagram model (EMF then allows these parts to be stored in
> the one document or split between documents (Resources)).
> The downside is that a real diagram has a lot more than just boxes and
> lines, nodes and edges -- there's text (with fonts and styling),
> connectedness of lines and possibly shapes, containment (grouping),
> shading, etc etc. Do we really want yet another standard defining all
> these things?
> |v| "analog - the new digital"
> --
> Michael Lawley, http://purl.org/NET/lawley
> Scientician.
> --------------------​--------------------​--------------------​---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe at gef dot tigris dot org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help at gef dot tigris dot org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe at gef dot tigris dot org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help at gef dot tigris dot org