[Uml-devel] Thoughts about U2 "tree view"

[Sebastian Stein]

Andrew Sutton <asutton at mcs.kent.edu> [030512 20:05]:
> in my thinking, each metamodel is going to have to define its own actions
> - it sounds kind of crappy, but there's too much metamodel specific stuff
> going on. also, we need to constrain which actions are available to which
> objects.  for example, we shouldn't be able to create attributes within
> packages or classes within operations (that would be some wild code :)

Why each metamodel? I thought UML and CWM are both defined in MOF, so why
not just a layer for MOF?
 
> if each metamodel plugin is responsible for creating and managing its own 
> actions, then we need to find some way of making sure of distributing those 
> actions to the rest of the application in a fairly generic method - that's 
> probably the base functionality you're talking about.

Yes.
 
> i think one possibility would be to define some kind of action manager that 
> implements a publish/subscribe style interface. components can subscribe to 
> sets of actions (defined by text strings or maybe an enum). when the app 
> reaches a state where a set of actions need to be updated, the subscribed 
> apps are notified by a published message and they can do whatever they have 
> to. of course, i might be re-inventing a wheel with this, but i'm not a 
> KAction guru by any stretch of the imagination.

I think KAction is good for this kind of stuff. We should at least use
KAction in our inheritance tree.

Steinchen
-- 
Umbrello UML Modeller
Description     : UML diagram drawing tool for KDE with code generation
Homepage        : http://www.umbrello.org/