用例 UML 对系统访问的不同方式(SMS、IVR、WEB)进行建模
我正在制作用例图,但在建模以下内容时遇到问题: 用户想要查询自己的余额,可以通过电话、短信或者IVR来实现。我应该如何表示不同的方式?每一种都有不同的流量。我应该为每个用例仅建模一个用例,还是应该将不同的方式表示为扩展用例。
I’m working on a USE CASE diagram but I’m having problems modeling the following:
A user wants to inquire his balance, but he can do it by phone, SMS or IVR. How should I represent the different ways? Each one has different flows. Should I model just one use case for each one, or should I represent the different ways as extended use case.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d5906/d59060df4059a6cc364216c4d63ceec29ef7fe66" alt="扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群"
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱,如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论,将不能在第一时间通知您!
发布评论
评论(3)
如果这三种情况在很大程度上共享流量(比如 >70%),我会将它们建模为一个用例。否则,最好对三个不同的用例进行建模。
这里的重点是可理解性。将三种不同的东西塞进一个东西会令人困惑,重复同样的事情三次也会让人困惑(尽管可能更少)。
If the three cases share flow to a huge extent (say >70%) I would model them as one use case. Otherwise it would be better to model three different use cases.
The point here is understandability. Cramming three different things into one is confusing, repeating the same three times is confusing as well (although probably less).
你的问题没有正确或错误的答案。 UML 允许对相同的情况进行不同的建模。这主要取决于您为用例图选择的抽象级别。
There is no right or wrong answer to your question. UML allows the same situation to be modeled differently. It depends mainly on the level of abstraction you choose for your use case diagrams.
您将拥有一个包含 3 个扩展的常见用例。然后,您可以使用序列图详细说明每个扩展。
You'd have a common use case with 3 extensions. You'd then detail each extension with sequences diagrams.