 | | UML +/- —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | (...) I work in the real world and I am usually at the leading edge where we are trying to get the basic concepts down. So UML is overly precise for what I typically need to convey. I am usually at the lines and boxes level and showing a mishmash of (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: UML +/- —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> Rereading that it sounds like I don't like/approve of UML. That would be incorrect. That it has been adopted as a standard instead of several rival notations and methodologies is a *huge( win (...) (23 years ago, 26-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: UML +/- —Shiri Dori
| | | | | (...) Understandable. Actually, I *didn't* get the impression that you didn't like UML; I just got the impression that its uses weren't fully, well, useful to you. <shameless plug> My dad's methodology, while not directly opposing UML, challanges (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | |
