Making most of use cases --UNLIKELY
•
0 likes•374 views
Are you making most of UML Use Cases? UNLIKELY The concept is PROFOUND but the definitions and explanations are NOT precise. Take a Quiz; Let's clarify and correct the definitions and explanations to make them useful. Take my single module training on Use Case Modeling....for just USD 150. Have a chat with me before paying.....satisfy yourself You should get recurring benefits 100X min...
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Making most of use cases --UNLIKELY
Similar to Making most of use cases --UNLIKELY (20)
More from Putcha Narasimham
More from Putcha Narasimham (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Making most of use cases --UNLIKELY
- 1. Making Most of Use Cases? Unlikely kenablersys 06 JUN 12
- 2. Use Case, A Good Concept Very PROFOUND, However, The name “Use Case” Its, definitions and Descriptions Are imprecise and confusing Find out from kenablersys what is wrong and what is the correction
- 3. Take this Quiz Write the Q number and the best option Give your reasons The Qs and A’s may be ill formed If so, please correct them and send to kenablersys@yahoo.com 3
- 4. Two actors are associated Q1? with the same Use Case A This is correct / E-Shop Useful. Supplier System supplies goods and E-Shop System sells Supplier BUY & those goods to SELL Customer Customer B Totally wrong C None of the above 4
- 5. Q2? What is Use Case? System Y X : X; B: System +Y; C: Only Y 5
- 6. Q3? Use Case is: A: A part the system B: A process C: An Actor D: An interface E: None of the above 6
- 7. Can an Actor of a system be Q4? a part of the same system? A: Yes, Some times B: No, never C: System consists of Actors and they interact with each other D: None of the above 7
- 8. What responds to an Actor Q5? in a Use Case Model? A Use Case Process B Use Case Description C Use Case D System as a whole E Other Actors associated with the system F None of the above 8
- 9. Can there be a Use Case, not Q6? associated with any Actor? A: Yes, all internal processes are such use cases B: Yes, it can be an <<included>> Use Case C: No, an internal process cannot be a Use Case. <<included>> is technically not a valid Use Case 9
- 10. Can one Use Case invoke Q7? another Use Case? A: Yes, it is possible if the Use Case is long and is split into smaller Use Cases B: Yes, <<extended>> Use Case is an example of this C: No, every use case is started by the System or Actor but not by another Use Case 10
- 11. Finished? See the Key in the next slide You may not agree with my answers We need to go through corrected and enhanced Use Case Definitions and Conventions Then we can Make Most of Use Case Modeling 11
- 12. The Key to Quiz 1-6 Question Correct Answer Q1 B Q2 C Q3 E Q4 B Q5 D Q6 C Q7 C 12
- 13. e-mail your Answers & Reasons to kenablersys@yahoo.com You are welcome to take A single module course on Use Case Modeling 3 to 4 Sessions over Skype There are 4 PPTs, 3 Templates, Examples, Quizzes with answers and a few reference documents + Mini Project All for USD 150 (may be revised) 13
- 14. These are extensively discussed On Linkedin Experts still differ The UML standard is imprecise So, let’s redefine and add precision 14
- 15. Not an END Get in touch with me E-mail kenablersys@yahoo.com Chat on Skype: prof.pvn START 15
Editor's Notes
- It may be too late to rename Use Case …. But it is a very bad choice of words for the unique concept What is wrong and why are explained in the word document “5 Use Case as SERVICE DIALOG--Analysis and Recommendation 29MAY12”
- The confusion and argument arises from considering a Use Case to be a process. By this redefinition of Use Case as Service Dialog…the very basis for that confusion is removed and this should simplify and speed up making the best use of Use Case concept. I invite counter examples or cases when / where this does not work.
- In my assessment Use Case as defined and described in UML and related publications is quiet OK but is NOT precise enough. It is too casual, lax and confusing. As a result it is grossly underutilized or misused or discarded. This view is developed after a close study, research and evaluation of alternatives. See my MS Word document 5 Use Case Viewed as SERVICE DIALOG. Some professionals have agreed with this proposal but some did not. I have tried to examine and accommodate the objections but not fully. As of end November 2011, I consider my present definitions and conventions quite comprehensive and precise….That is my claim with my reasons. They may be modified after well reasoned arguments and examples.
- h
- We can have nested Use Case Diagrams as defined in UML and use suitable naming conventions. However for a defined system boundary, the external entities (Actors) can be clearly identified. In a simplified representation only those who act directly are considered to be the External Entities EE but there are exceptions. If the EE merely converts and transmits data / information it is not to be treated as an Actor. The EE must be able to independently generate or consume data / information. This is somewhat subtle and not spelt out in many publications but it is mentioned in Yordon’s method (Wikipedia)