The document discusses Entity-Relationship (E-R) modeling and its comparison to the Unified Modeling Language (UML). It describes various E-R notation styles including Chen diagrams and IDEFIX notation. It also explains that UML class diagrams are similar to E-R diagrams but with differences in how relationships, cardinalities, and generalizations are depicted. The document provides examples of how constructs in E-R diagrams compare to their representations in UML class diagrams.
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0 ratings0% found this document useful (0 votes)
45 views17 pages
UML and CODD's Rules
The document discusses Entity-Relationship (E-R) modeling and its comparison to the Unified Modeling Language (UML). It describes various E-R notation styles including Chen diagrams and IDEFIX notation. It also explains that UML class diagrams are similar to E-R diagrams but with differences in how relationships, cardinalities, and generalizations are depicted. The document provides examples of how constructs in E-R diagrams compare to their representations in UML class diagrams.
UML has many components to graphically model different aspects of an entire software system UML Class Diagrams correspond to E-R Diagram, but several differences.
• Class diagram. A class diagram is similar to an E-R diagram. Later in this section we illustrate a few features of class diagrams and how they relate to E-R diagrams. • Use case diagram. Use case diagrams show the interaction between users and the system, in particular the steps of tasks that users perform (such as withdrawing money or registering for a course). • Activity diagram. Activity diagrams depict the flow of tasks between various components of a system. • Implementation diagram. Implementation diagrams show the system components and their interconnections, both at the software component level and the hardware component level.
Binary relationship sets are represented in UML by
just drawing a line connecting the entity sets. The relationship set name is written adjacent to the line. The role played by an entity set in a relationship set may also be specified by writing the role name on the line, adjacent to the entity set. The relationship set name may alternatively be written in a box, along with attributes of the relationship set, and the box is connected, using a dotted line, to the line depicting the relationship set.
A simple class diagram for a commercial software application, in UML notation. The diagram shows five classes: Customer, Corporate Customer, Personal Customer, Order and Order Line. Every class is divided into three sections: name (shaded), attributes and methods (in cursive). Classes might relate to each other inheritance. These relationships are denoted by decorated links connecting two classes. For instance, the fact that the one customer can place more than one order is represented by a single relationship between 'customer' and 'order'. The numbers at the end-points of the link are the multiplicity of the relationship, telling how many objects will participate in the relationship. In the example, the customer is related to 'n' orders, but every order is only related to a single customer. Another typical relationship in UML diagrams is inheritance. This applies when two classes are similar but have different features. In the figure, both corporate customer and personal customer are related to the customer class by an inheritance relationship, indicating that they are able to place orders but in different ways.
Entity Sets Relationship Sets Design Issues Mapping Constraints Keys E-R Diagram Extended E-R Features Design of An E-R Database Schema Reduction of An E-R Schema To Tables