Content deleted Content added
Removed {{Copypaste}} tag: copyright violations addressed, see talk. |
m →OPM vs. SysML and UML: grammar (missing word). Sentence still may need some restructuring. |
||
Line 366:
; OPM vs. UML
The differences between OPM and UML are highly perceivable during the analysis and design stages. While UML is a multi-model, OPM supports a single unifying structure-behavior model. The crucial differences stem from the structure-oriented approach of UML, in which behavior is spread over thirteen diagram types, a fact that inevitably invokes the model multiplicity problem.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Peleg | first1 = M. | last2 = Dori | first2 = D. | year = 2000 | title = The Model Multiplicity Problem: Experimenting with Real-Time Specification Methods | journal = IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering| volume = 26 | issue = 8| pages = 742–759 | doi=10.1109/32.879812| citeseerx = 10.1.1.321.5507 }}</ref> First, using the OPM approach enables to view at main diagram (SD) the main process, objects and the connection between them.<ref name="Object-Process Methodology – A Holistic Systems Paradigm"/>{{Page needed|date=October 2017}} In addition, it is easy to understand what is the main system's benefit (presented at the SD). In OPM, it's also easier to understand the main three aspects of the system: behavior, structure and functionality (contrary to UML which describes these aspects with different types of diagrams).<ref name="Object-Process Methodology – A Holistic Systems Paradigm"/>{{Page needed|date=October 2017}} Database unfolding modeling contributes to the understanding of system and all details which is stored in the system. In addition, creating in-zooming enables simplifying the model. OPM requires extensive knowledge of systematic processes such as how the system saved the path and gets decisions.
==Generating SysML views from an OPM model==
| |||