- — William Cook (@w7cook)Wed, Jun 20 2012 20:47:482) the idea that 7 (or 13) diagram formats in UML can cover everything is crazy. What about GUIs, web wireframes, authorization, etc. ???
- — William Cook (@w7cook)Wed, Jun 20 2012 21:15:223) UML has encouraged the idea that models must be graphical. Ridiculous! Text and graphic models are both useful and often interchangeable
- Since I’ve created this story, William added two more reasons …
- — William Cook (@w7cook)Wed, Jun 20 2012 22:05:294) UML is at once too large and complex and at the same time very limiited. Stereotype and profiles are not effective for usable extensions.
- — William Cook (@w7cook)Wed, Jun 20 2012 22:53:085) The PIM/PSM distinction is misguided. The purpose of high-level models is not platform independence. It is about "what" versus "how".
- And this discussion between William and Rafael sparked off …
- — Rafael Chaves (@abstratt)Wed, Jun 20 2012 22:03:17@w7cook all that being said, I'd be happy to use something better, don't know of any alternatives http://abstratt.com/blog/2010/02/08/uml-may-suck-but-is-there-anything-better/ …blog/2010/02/08/uml-may-suck-but-is-there-anything-better/
- — William Cook (@w7cook)Wed, Jun 20 2012 22:33:54
- — Rafael Chaves (@abstratt)Wed, Jun 20 2012 22:41:54@w7cook "Behavioral semantics defined using model interpreters written in Ruby" << is Ensō's "spec" tied to Ruby? Or is that an impl detail
- — William Cook (@w7cook)Wed, Jun 20 2012 22:48:55@abstratt It's an implementation detail. But having a real reference implementation is a good thing. There is very little dependence on Ruby
3 Reasons on why UML is the worst thing that ever happened to MDE.
byAdrian Kuhn4,360 Views