Default to not show connectors in other diagrams

[LeeD]

Hi
Is there a way in ea 10 to default new connectors to not show in other diagrams? I know I can right click on them/visibility/hide connector in other diagrams but when you're making a lot it's a pain.

Cheers
Lee
[original message]

[M@localhost Simon M]

No, there is not.
[original message]

[LeeD]

Consider this a feature request then :-)
[original message]

[Vos@localhost Jacob Vos]

I fully support this feature request!
[original message]

[AndyJ]

I must admit to being puzzled by this request...

If an association is not appropriate on all diagrams, maybe that is a case where you have two classes which appear to be the same thing...

...but are actually separate things.

In the past, stray associations on diagrams has demonstrated flawed thinking on my part.

Andy
[original message]

[Bellekens@localhost Geert Bellekens]

I agree with Andy.
If you really need this feature you are doing it wrong 8-)

If a relation between two elements shouldn't be shown anywhere but in one location then the relation probably shouldn't exist in the first place.

Remember, EA is not Visio. It' a modelling tool, to build models that can be graphically represented. Not a tool to make pretty pictures.

Geert
[original message]

[Ortmann@localhost Helmut Ortmann]

Hi,

in principle I agree with Andy and Geert.

There are diagrams like context diagrams which represent special views where only particular relationships are viewed. They are valuable because they show a useful view for a particular question.

I don't know the silver bullet but I'm also annoyed by unwanted relationships.

My idea is: In a digram you can control if a new relationships is automatically added or not.

In my opinion: A diagram is a view to the model. Therefore there is no need to visualize all relationships. The author of the diagram has to say what the meaning of the diagram is (the story of the diagram, or what I want to tell you).

Helmut

[original message]

[qwerty]

I'm with AndyJ and Geert. Honestly I was about to write the same but did not for not being too grumpy with Christmas so near.

q.
[original message]

[Vos@localhost Jacob Vos]

I agree with what Helmut writes. To say it in other words: there is a difference between a model (containing concepts) and the representation of the model (references to concepts). �A diagram is a representation.

For example I have three concepts: role A, role B and role C (guess you use ArchiMate). All those three roles have relations with each other (let's say flows).

Now I create a diagram in which I want to focus on role A. So I have roles A, B and C, and only the relations in which A is a party.

And now the awkward thing occurs: whenever I add a relation between B and C, it's added to my diagram that has A as focus.

Grrrrrr.....

A modelling tool should offer good support to this. (Visio is not a modelling tool, but a drawing tool.)
[original message]

[Bellekens@localhost Geert Bellekens]

I like Helmuts suggestion too.
I'm not against hiding relations on some diagrams. I'm against hiding relations on all diagrams (but one).

Geert

PS. Now I'm going back to my cave before the whole christmassy thing starts :P
[original message]

[AndyJ]

I am frankly amazed at the trend I am seeing here.

I am also retreating to my cave to avoid Christmas!

Yours in Grinchliness...

Andy
[original message]

[rothnic]

This is probably not so much a cut and dry topic. But, the overarching issue here is that many people use these tools in different ways. What one person may think is poor modeling using one paradigm, it could be considered good practice in another. The way for a tool like this to support many users is to provide the ability to configure the different default characteristics per type, stereotype, diagram, etc. If there were settings allowing you to override the default relationships that show up on a given type of diagram, this would meet the need I believe.

As for this being a modeling issue. I find that sometimes people operate too much at a "global" level. So, they define flows (dependencies) between classes/blocks instead of between properties/parts. If you want to say data flows between System1 and System2, that relationship would show up in all cases. What if you want to assert that in a certain situation, data does not flow, or a different type of data flows?

This is why I think modeling a Domain or other context element, then associating (composition/reference) the Classes/Systems provides some containment for your modeling into a specific context. I could have a System of Systems domain block, that has a composition relationship to System1 and System2. System1 and System2 are given a role.

Then, you could allocate behavior to sys1:System1 or sys2:System2, or define Flows between them, and then these relationships would not show up when you place System1 or System2 into a different diagram. Of course there will be cases where this doesn't make sense, but this is how I typically handle it.
[original message]

[skiwi]

7F525B5A4243197845435A565959370 wrote:

In my opinion: A diagram is a view to the model. Therefore there is no need to visualize all relationships. The author of the diagram has to say what the meaning of the diagram is (the story of the diagram, or what I want to tell you).

I concur with this, for example in some high level or conceptual diagrams I show connections between major components that don't belong in detailed diagrams.

Simon

PS did I mention that an EA release concentrating solely (http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1307921175/2#2) on diagram (http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1277094607/0#0) enhancements (http://www.sparxsystems.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1313372981/1#1) would be a good thing?!
[original message]