简体   繁体   English

UML用例图 - 抽奖系统

[英]UML Use Case Diagram - Raffle System

In this use case diagram, I'm trying to show how the raffle admin can view the updated raffle list after a customer has entered the raffle. 在这个用例图中,我试图展示抽奖管理员在客户进入抽奖后如何查看更新的抽奖清单。 Once the customer has entered the raffle, the system will verify and check for duplicates and if there are no duplicates, the raffle list will be updated. 一旦客户进入抽奖活动,系统将验证并检查是否有重复,如果没有重复,则抽奖清单将被更新。

The following image is my attempt on the scenario however, I'm not sure if its correct. 下面的图片是我对场景的尝试,但我不确定它是否正确。 Can you please advise me? 你能告诉我吗?

edit: I have several questions: 编辑:我有几个问题:

1) In the event where I use the raffle system itself to verify the raffle entry, I would not need to put a use case for verification because the raffle system is not an actor correct? 1)如果我使用抽奖系统本身验证抽奖入场,我不需要用一个用例进行验证,因为抽奖系统不是演员正确吗?

2) However, if the actor is another staff for the raffle system (where he or she sorts out the raffle manually), would the use case for verification be applicable? 2)但是,如果演员是抽奖系统的另一名工作人员(他或她手动对抽奖活动进行分类),验证的用例是否适用?

3) If so, is this the correct diagram to illustrate (2)? 3)如果是这样,这是正确的图表来说明(2)吗?

Update entry -- <<includes>> --> Verification

Your diagram has a couple of errors: 您的图表有几个错误:

  • System is never an external actor. System永远不是外部演员。 It's acting inside the system under consideration represented by the boundary. 它在由边界表示的系统内部起作用。
  • Therefore Verification is not a valid use case. 因此, Verification不是有效的用例。 It's some internal functionality. 这是一些内部功能。
  • <<extend>> works the other way round (move the arrow pointing to the other side). <<extend>>以相反的方式工作(将箭头指向另一侧)。
  • The same for <<include>> . <<include>>
  • Verification is not a name for a use case. Verification不是用例的名称。 It needs predicate/subject and optionally an object. 它需要谓词/主语和可选的对象。
  • Generalization (to Update entry ) is a bad idea for UCs and probably not what you wanted to show here (so what is the intention here?). 泛化( Update entry )对于UC来说是一个坏主意,可能不是你想在这里展示的(所以这里有什么意思?)。
  • Basically UCs are about added value brought to their primary actors. 基本上,UCs是为其主要参与者带来的附加价值。 They are not about functions involved. 它们与所涉及的功能无关。 Try to get this focus and avoid anything that tends to be functional decomposition! 尝试获得这个焦点,避免任何往往功能分解!

Edit 编辑

  1. Exactly. 究竟。
  2. If someone's there to do that, you have an actor and such a UC (though it shall be named correctly). 如果有人在那里做,你有一个演员和这样的UC(虽然它应该被正确命名)。
  3. This can be correct. 这可能是正确的。 Whether it is correct depends on the requirements to the system under consideration (what you finally want to achieve) 是否正确取决于对所考虑的系统的要求(您最终想要实现的目标)

声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.

 
粤ICP备18138465号  © 2020-2024 STACKOOM.COM