I read many articles, and saw a lot of images and I can't answer the question whether objects of View classes or DB classes should be contained on the sequence diagram or it should be more generalized?
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
All classes that are going to relevant to the design of the operation contained within the sequence should be there.
By making too many things generalized you risk missing important detail. I tend to include references in my sequences from the UI element all the way to the DB. If you are worried that the View and the DB are not fixed and using concrete refs will make your disgram incorrect. This shows that the design will need a close look! Maybe the contract between the view and the middle tier and the DB and middle tier needs to be better defined. Then all you have to do is include references to the contract in a general diagram and further detail in seperate diagrams for each implementation.
You can see the depth that many go to in this intro.
Remember, UML is supposed to be about good communication of ideas/designs. Do what conveys all the iformation that is needed in the simplest way possible!
2 Comments
deem
I did it s14.postimage.org/6cjk1v9kh/Clipboard02.png is there something wrong? 'wyslij()' means 'submit()' and 'Uzytkownik_Widok' means 'User_View'.
tigerswithguitars
This is pretty useless without the wordy parts of the design. It tells me nothing useful. Why are many of the calls numbered not labeled? Why are arguments not specified? What are the objects that are interacting? What DB interactions are beig made? Each of those could mean 'Delete all tables' for all I know. I can't do your homework for you, but I can tell you this is not enough detail to make any judgements. Sorry.