3

I'm working on my school project and I need to draw a UML deployment diagram. I haven't found any normal examples, so help me, please.

I have troubles with frontend application presentation -- should I specify that it is served on nodejs and how to, if yes?

What I have currently:

enter image description here

Christophe
  • 68,716
  • 7
  • 72
  • 138
Daria Peters
  • 111
  • 1
  • 10
  • Looks good. I'm not familiar with React, but if it's something running inside the web client that's a fine representation. – qwerty_so Nov 23 '18 at 17:41
  • My only comment would be that the Node representation is an instance (the underline under the node type name) whereas the component is a classifier (no underline in the name). You might want to make the component an instance too, if you are modelling an actual deployment, or make the node a type if you are modelling a logical deployment design. I'll draw something up an put in an answer. – muszeo Nov 23 '18 at 20:42

1 Answers1

1

My only comment would be that the Node representation is an instance (the underline under the node type name) whereas the component is a classifier (no underline in the name). You might want to make the component an instance too, if you are modelling an actual deployment, or make the node a type if you are modelling a logical deployment design.

I've put together an example. You'll have to excuse it though -- the syntax of the instances needs underlines and I'm not sure why that's not displaying. But hopefully you get the picture (no pun intended). [Edit -- fixed that!].

Regarding your query about the NodeJs part of this. That would be a separate node, with a NodeJS component on it. The Web Client is the browser machine, or possibly the browser itself if you want to argue that, which is where your JS is executing. You might want to go in to more detail and add these for clarity.

React App

muszeo
  • 2,312
  • 9
  • 13
  • Probably a tool issue. Enterprise Architect shows it correctly for the node but also without underline in the component :-/ UML 2.5 para. 9.8.4 is quite explicit about the notation. So bugs wherever you look. – qwerty_so Nov 24 '18 at 11:39
  • It is indeed! In this case I'm to blame, as it's my own tool LOL! Nonetheless, bug fixed. This did give me recourse to check if the 2.5 notation for components had changed, which it hasn't, apart from that the stereotype <> is mandatory (been like that since 2.0). So another bug-ette there. It's bugs everywhere :-/. – muszeo Nov 25 '18 at 00:39
  • Not sure about the stereotype though. IIRC you can _replace_ them with an icon. Too late to look it up... – qwerty_so Nov 25 '18 at 01:21
  • Found it on p. 208 in 11.6.4: _If the icon symbol is shown, the keyword «component» may be hidden._ – qwerty_so Nov 25 '18 at 11:13