Forums for the Business Analyst

 
  Modern Analyst Forums  Business and Sy...  Requirements  IDEF0 vs. Use Case
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post 4/10/2008 4:50 PM
User is offline David Wright
141 posts
www.iag.biz
7th Level Poster




Re: IDEF0 vs. Use Case 
Modified By Adrian M.  on 4/10/2008 7:09:13 PM)

Ok, its time we had this discussion on Modern Analyst...

I have not used IDEF either, but I gather its focus is Requirements. UML, on the other hand, was created as a software modeling language, a tool for design. I know, I know, people use it for Requirements, because its popular. Well, I like to use the proper tools, not the popular ones, as the proper tools do a better job.

I also know I will not convince anyone using UML for Requirements that they would be better off not using it, but for people new to our profession, you should know what UML really, and know you can do your job effectively without it.

I have drawn the line in the sand.... Dave Wright, see me at http://www.ittoolbox.com/profiles/davidwright?pv=1 as well...


David Wright
 
New Post 4/10/2008 4:58 PM
User is offline David Wright
141 posts
www.iag.biz
7th Level Poster




Re: IDEF0 vs. Use Case 

...and before I forget, Use Cases are NOT a UML artifact. They have their own origin, and the UML gurus just decided to adopt them. I have done requirements using use cases for projects that did not use UML, and for those that did.

I would say that Use Cases themselves are the most popular artifact for requirements today, and UML is just tagging along.

(And to avoid any discussions of a certain vein, I do think UML is great! Developers I have worked with who used it produced much better software, and I will always recommend its use...but by developers, not Business Analysts.)


David Wright
 
New Post 4/10/2008 6:17 PM
User is offline Adrian M.
741 posts
3rd Level Poster




Re: IDEF0 vs. Use Case 

 liddelk wrote

Hi Guys,

Fact is that UML is the industry standard, not IDEFO. IDEFO is definitely old hat. UML activiity diagrams are good for process. So what Adrian said may be true but its bad advice. You need portable skills in this industry. UML is extremely portable. You might find some old coders around somewhere who understand IDEFO but most people don't.

Kimbo

Hmmm...

I don't like to give bad advice... ;-) I think, however, that we are on the same page.  If you notice my second post, I did advise Vinny to pick up UML as it is the industry standard for modeling software.

At the same time, I agree with David: UML was not originally designed for modeling business processes and requirements.  Yes - it is widely used for that purpose however there are better tools out there.  For example, BPMN is a much better tool for modeling business processes than a UML Activity Diagram especially in an environment which is based on SOA (Service Oriented Architecture).

- Adrian


Adrian Marchis
Business Analyst Community Blog - Post your thoughts!
 
New Post 4/11/2008 1:02 AM
User is offline Kimbo
453 posts
5th Level Poster


Re: IDEF0 vs. Use Case 

G'day Adrian,

Think you'll find that the "universal" part of UML means it wasn' t just designed as a software design tool. It was designed to cover the whole SDLC. Check out the 3 amigos book - The UML User Guide or whatever its called. My post wasn't meant to be insulting, I was just trying to point out that BA's should try to use what most other people are using. And like it or not the industry standard is UML.  Use cases are a UML artefact btw - whoever said that. They are central to the functional specification. Don't care who claims responsibility for inventing them.

IDEFO does the job. It is just a different way of looking at the same thing. I used to use Yourdon's methodolody with data flow diagrams - they work too.

Thing is that doing IDEFO diagrams is like programming in COBOL. Yes it works but who wants to use old technology?

Kimbo

 
New Post 4/11/2008 1:25 AM
User is offline bas
21 posts
www.uml2.ru
9th Level Poster


Re: IDEF0 vs. Use Case 
Modified By bas  on 4/11/2008 2:25:32 AM)

Guys,

It's really good way to mix IDEF0 (or BPMN) and UML. It's difficult to describe BP by using UML but you can (should) use IDEF0 (or BPMN) to do it. Pls keep in mind BP does not have any relationship with SW in general. After that you should drill down and work with SW requirements. At this level you can (should) use UML to model requirements and architecture (use case, activity, class and other diagrams). Many tools support BPMN and UML in one and it's modern trend to mix BPMN and UML in SW development.

 
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
  Modern Analyst Forums  Business and Sy...  Requirements  IDEF0 vs. Use Case

Community Blog - Latest Posts

Is Agile a reason to avoid documentation? I bet this question shows up again and again while working with product requirements. On one side, we have got long specifications, complicated diagrams, mystical technical design, too many prototypes and pretty obvious for engineers user guides (do we really need so much?). On the other side, can we actual...
The cloud-native application development has helped enterprises all around the globe reduce time-to-market, enhance performance, and develop agility and flexibility. Several enterprises are achieving these results by migrating their systems or traditional monolithic applications to the cloud. But to gain from the real benefits of cloud technology, ...
So you’ve found the perfect time and place to study and you’re ready to finally get some work done. You’ve pulled out your laptop, your textbook, and your notes, and four different highlighters. After five minutes of reading your textbook, you start zoning out and thinking about puppies. Then, you go on Tumblr and look at cut...

 



Upcoming Live Webinars




 

Copyright 2006-2021 by Modern Analyst Media LLC