Content deleted Content added
→Merge with Object modeling language: new section |
|||
Line 13:
# Bringing it all together under the term "Object-oriented modeling" seems like a good alternative.
-- [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] ([[User talk:Mdd|talk]]) 23:56, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
:I oppose the merge. First, they are clearly different things. UML is an object modeling language. Object modeling is what you use UML for. Object modeling should talk about things like Booch, Jacobsen, etc. the process of modeling. You can do object modeling drawing boxes and arrows on a white board with no modeling language. Regarding your specific issues: 1) I don't see why object modeling language is confusing. It seems perfectly clear. As I said UML is an obvious example but there are other languages I've used. You could say OWL is a modeling language and Protege is a tool to do modeling. 2) I agree, this article as it stands now is awful, that is an issue with the article. 3) Again, no confusion UML is a modeling language object modeling is what you do with it. 4) Your last point wasn't substantive, no reply needed. BTW, I do agree that renaming this article is probably warranted. I was surprised there was no article for OO methods (booch, rumbaugh, etc.) If there was such an article I would say merging OO modeling into THAT article might make sense. [[User:MadScientistX11|MadScientistX11]] ([[User talk:MadScientistX11|talk]]) 16:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
| |||