I am learning to use Sparx Enterprise Architect for requirements management. I am wondering, what is the best practice, or any practice to describe CSV file structure (i.e. header names and their types) that will be imported by designed system?
Do you use taggeed values, or simply just "Notes" area? Or maybe just link sample csv file, but then, how to include it in printed documentation?
Thank you for advice!
UML is, of course, not good at describing structures such as CSV formats. You can create classes with attributes "col_1", "col_2", etc, but the simplest way is probably to add a linked document to the requirement (right-click and select Create Linked Document).
The linked document can be included in a generated document quite easily. In the template editor, simply select the Linked Document node under the Element node.
These linked documents are stored inside the EA project. They are RTF, so they are very limited compared to other formats, but they support tables and other basic formatting, which is usually enough for requirement details.
Related
I have multiple correlated XSDs that needs to be uploaded in order to create a large library, but I haven't had any option to do so on the interface. The option to select XSD is only limited to one file.
Is there a way to go around this issue?
You need to create a 'Super Schema' which will include or import all of your top level schema.
Please see the knowledge base article:
Liquid XML Data Binder - Super Schema
I'm trying to create a datamodel in the Oracle Data Modeler module that is available in Oracle SQL Developer. I would like to maintain my data dictionary from this model. To do this (I think) I need a generated DDL file for which the attributes are not longer than 30 characters.
I have just discovered Oracle SQL Developer and am completely new to creating these kind of models. What I have done so far. I have created a logical model and have engineered it to a relational model. From the relational model I can then generate DDL scripts that I can run on the database to make the changes I want.
When doing this I run into a problem. When engineering the logical model to a relational model I can see that the foreign keys I have made become more than 30 characters. This is because it seems to generate the name as (see picture)
From searching it seems you should be able to fix this with naming standard templates. I have looked for this menu option but can't find it. I have found the name abbreviations functionality for which you can upload .csv files but I think this is for something different.
Rightclicking on the logical model in the datamodeler browser view gives me the opportunity to Apply naming standards, but this gives me a message that I should turn off the keep as the name of the originating attribute option (see picture). I have looked for this but can't find this option.
My version of Oracle SQL Developer is 4.1.3.20, Build MAIN-20.78.
Please let me know if my story is not clear. Thanks.
Generated column name
Applying name standards message
You will find the option under Tools/Preferences/Data Modeler/Model/Logical
I was able to define a custom programming language in Enterprise Architect with custom data types by navigating to Project > Settings > Code Engineering Datatypes.... When I create a MDG file, I have the option to include the programming language definition, and as far as I can tell, this is working - at least, in a new project that uses the MDG file, I can see the programming language.
Now I would like to have the same behavior for DBMS and database datatypes defined through Project > Settings > Database Datatypes.... From my tests, I get the impression that these types are not automatically included in the MDG file, and I haven't found a trivial way to include them. Is there a way to add the database datatypes to the MDG file as well? If not, is there a way to achieve the same result through the automation interface, e. g. by writing an add-in that creates the DBMS and the associated datatypes?
Going the MDG Technology way, the answer appears to be no. It's possible to trick EA (11) into exporting DB types in an MDG Technology, but even if they're in there, they will be ignored in projects that use the MDG Technology.
DB types and code engineering (or, sometimes, "programming language") datatypes are both stored in EA's t_datatypes table. The same product name can be used for both a programming language and a DB engine.
It looks like the MDG Technology Wizard scans this table looking for rows with "Code" in the Type column during the setup (Code Modules wizard page), but when the time comes to write the actual datatypes into the output file, it retrieves all rows with the specified ProductName.
This means that if you create a DB product and populate it with a set of datatypes, and then create a programming language product with the same name but just a single dummy datatype, your DB types will be included in the MDG Technology XML file along with the dummy type.
However, it appears that while the regular properties dialog (for classes etc) checks the loaded MDG Technologies in addition to the t_datatypes table in order to populate the Language drop-down list, the specialized properties dialog for database tables does not check the MDG Technologies when populating the corresponding Database drop-down. So even though the datatypes are in the file, you can't use them.
Going the Add-In route, the answer is yes.
Have your Add-In respond to the EA_FileOpen event and check the Repository.Datatypes collection to see if your DB types are installed and if not, add them.
You don't actually need to write an Add-In if you don't want, you can write an in-EA script. The only thing an Add-In can do that scripts can't is respond to events (which is why those are listed in the Add-In Model section of the help file). So with a script you would have to trigger the function manually.
There is also an API to manage project's reference data of which code / DB datatypes is one category, but it only gives you control of some of the categories (eg requirement types and constraint types), and the datatype category is not one of them.
Once many teams work with the same mongodb database there needs to be some way to express what each document may contain. Otherwise the document will end be having "email", "mail", "email_addr" fields added by each team. What's the best way to represent this for the purpose of communication across teams?
Obviously, the best way is what the team is most comfortable with. It can be UML, whiteboard drawings, XML mappings, model code files, maybe even haiku poems :)
I personally prefer using an ODM (mongoid). It encourages you to specify all fields in the model class. Then you just need one glance at it to understand the schema.
What you can do is create your Objects first in a set of commons that all team members import into their projects. If you change schema design, you update Commons project and all team members import latest.
It's more about process and project management and less about technology given Mongo's schema-less design. One thing we find helpful is design your Tests first and lately, SoapUI and LoadUI have been excellent tools. Once you define your tests, it can stub the returns for you and produces HTML documentation you can distribute to team.
Check out: http://www.soapui.org/REST-Testing/working-with-rest-services.html
When you create collection, just add to it some first "reference" object that would have all the fields/sub-objects that object of this collection can possibly have and use it as "schema". You can even write validator that would check that new objects conform to this reference object.
I have some documents and an ontology for some concepts. Are there any frameworks that automatically extracts those concepts from the given documents and creates triples? The ontology must contain special properties?
I found UIMA, but as far as I understood with UIMA I can do only something like this:
create some dictionaries which keep associations with the ontology
use this dictionary with ConceptMapper
write a CAS consumer that creates the triples and persists them -
I don't like this approach because I have to keep in sync the concepts from the ontology and the dictionary.
Can be UIMA used differently, or are there any advanced frameworks that can use directly my ontology with lets say some custom properties as input and based on it annotate the documents?
I want to use ontologies as domain model because I want to create further a knowledge base and ontologies seem more flexible than for example relational model.
Thanks.
After spending more time searching on Google I found GATE and more specifically OntoRoot Gazetter and Large KB Gazetteer.
OntoRoot Gazetteer is a type of a dynamically created gazetteer that is, in combination with few other generic GATE resources, capable of producing ontology-based annotations over the given content with regards to the given ontology. This gazetteer is a part of ‘Gazetteer_Ontology_Based’ plugin that has been developed as a part of the TAO project.
I didn't test them but these ones seem good solution candidates for my problem.