Timeline for Confusion about associations in UML class diagram
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 2014 at 13:03 | comment | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau | @user1534664: The strength of a relation should become clearer when aggregation & composition have been discussed in class. If it is still unclear after that, feel free to as a new question about it. | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 13:02 | comment | added | Bart van Ingen Schenau |
@user1534664: You specify a range (a..b) in the multiplicity if any value from that range satisfies the multiplicity requirements. A common one is for an optional relation, where you would use 0..1 to indicate that the association will have either one or no instance of the class on that end.
|
|
| Dec 12, 2014 at 12:31 | vote | accept | user1534664 | ||
| Dec 12, 2014 at 12:31 | comment | added | user1534664 |
Amazing answer. Bedankt :P For item 4: I don't really understand the concept of a relation being able to have "strength". Can you elaborate on that? Also, when do we specify the a in the multiplicity a..b? I understand how its useful when modelling ERDs, but class diagrams are slightly different.
|
|
| Dec 12, 2014 at 11:45 | history | answered | Bart van Ingen Schenau | CC BY-SA 3.0 |