Talk:Activity diagram

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Diagram is not valid UML 1.x nor UML 2.0[edit]

In UML 2.0, all flows into an activity must be active. So, this diagram would not get into the first activity. as the flow from the decision node is not active when the first activity is attempted to be entered.

Technically the diagram is valid, it just can't execute.

In UML 1.x, a flow can't be split without using the fork bar. This diagram has a fork caused by unlabeled split node. -- Mjchonoles 08:56, 30 December 2005.

The diagram at the top right should have open arrows rather than filled ones. There is a bit of confusion due to some incorrect diagrams in the UML spec itself. See Spec 1.5, page 2-180. Compare ibid., pp. 3-155 to 3-168. See also Spec 2.5, page 395, immediately following fig. 15.4, which states "An ActivityEdge...is notated by an open arrowhead line connecting two ActivityNodes." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robtrodes (talkcontribs) 16:53

I think you should create two diagrams modeling the same thing, one in UML 1.x and one in UML 2.x to illustrate the differences. 208.49.239.6 (talk) 13:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Difference from Flowcharts[edit]

How is this different from flowcharts, apart from forking and joining? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.133.165 (talk) 15:44, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

That is indeed the most important difference. Rp (talk) 16:54, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Missing arrow head[edit]

The chart is missing an arrow head194.176.105.141 (talk) 12:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

  1. From "Call for ideas"--to-->"time left" diamond.
  2. From "no time left" diamond(near "Wrap up")--to-->"no time left" diamond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.183.225.12 (talk) 18:25, 28 January 2015 (UTC)