Timeline for Use case diagram (secondary actors)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 31, 2020 at 9:38 | vote | accept | Ahmed Alhallag | ||
| Oct 31, 2020 at 9:38 | comment | added | Ahmed Alhallag | I wish I was a student of yours. Thank you so much sir! | |
| Oct 31, 2020 at 9:35 | comment | added | Christophe | @AhmedAlhallag 3) I don't like to give online references. But Jacobson provides a good overview on modern use case analysis, and here you can find some useful advices. To go farther you really need to get a good book, for example Bittner & Spence (table of content) which is still a very good investment. | |
| Oct 31, 2020 at 9:32 | comment | added | Christophe | @AhmedAlhallag 1) yes this would be correct (it doesn't show that both use-cases are related, but this is not a problem since it's a use-case diagram and not a process analysis diagram). 2) «extends» means it's optional and if you start to think about sequence, you're no longer in a use-case analysis. | |
| Oct 31, 2020 at 9:01 | comment | added | Ahmed Alhallag | Thank you @Christophie ! A couple of follow-ups (I'm still learning about the manner so excuse me naive questions): 1) regarding A, If i left the two use cases (Admin:Process refunds, Customer:Request refund) but removed the association line between them, would this be considered correct ? 2) if I removed place order and made the "pay with credit" extends on "process shipping instructions" (which makes 'pay with credit' the final sequence), would this be considered correct ? 3) can you recommend any online sources/books on the difference between use cases and functional decomposition? | |
| Oct 31, 2020 at 8:58 | history | edited | Christophe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 242 characters in body
|
| Oct 31, 2020 at 8:43 | history | edited | Christophe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 855 characters in body
|
| Oct 31, 2020 at 8:24 | history | answered | Christophe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |