UML Diagramm / Visualization Tool

[nHirsenkorn]

An UML-style diagram for the proto messages would help to get a fast overview.
Other visualization types would also fit.

@nHirsenkorn
https://github.com/malisas/schema-uml

I don't have linux yet ...

We do have a propper Doxygen documentation (see newest readme.md). Do you think the UML description of the messages is good this way? @nHirsenkorn

Maybe @SchallerBMW could also check, if the diagrams are fine now, because you will eventually work through the documentation :) ?

That seems to be solved by #95 , @carsten-kuebler ?

[carsten-kuebler]

We can change to an UML diagram look & feel with the configuration parameter "UML_LOOK = YES". Drawbacks: Doxygen for proto script doesn't support UML diagrams.

1. You can't get the cardinality information
   e.g. Protomessage: OSI:xxx … repeated OSI:yyy --> UMLdiagram: OSI:xxx 1 --------- 0..* OSI:yyy
2. Basic datatypes of attributes are not recognized.
3. Enums are not recognized.

I will show some diagrams and discuss the pro and cons (osi::LowLevelData) with the used proto2cpp script.

A) Actual collaboration diagram (HIDE_UNDOC_RELATIONS=NO and UML_LOOK=NO):

Pro: all attributes are visualized.
Con: No UML-class diagram; repeated attributes aren’t included.

B) A simpler collaboration diagram (HIDE_UNDOC_RELATIONS=YES and UML_LOOK=NO) used in previous osi documents:

Pro: -
Con: No UML-class diagram; repeated attributes aren’t included, attributes to basic datatypes or repeated attributes aren’t visualized.

If we change from collaboration diagram to UML-diagrams:

C) Actual collaboration diagram (HIDE_UNDOC_RELATIONS=YES and UML_LOOK=YES):

Pro: Attributes to basic datatypes or repeated attributes are included.
Con: Cardinalities between RadarReflection and RadarReflectionList are missing; basic datatypes are missing; repeated attributes are missing (eg. reflection  RadarReflection is missing or x,y,z  double is not mentioned)

D) Actual collaboration diagram (HIDE_UNDOC_RELATIONS=NO and UML_LOOK=YES):

Pro: Repeated attributes are included.
Con: Cardinalities between RadarReflection and RadarReflectionList are missing; repeated attributes are missing (eg. RadarReflection is missing). UML attribute fields are empty.

Enumerations aren’t visualized at all (eg. LidarPoint reflection_type):

A)

B)

C)

D)

The mentioned PYTHON script https://github.com/malisas/schema-uml has also some drawbacks...

Pro: Enums are visualized; package graph is included; repeated attributes are visualized
Con: Script visualize complete proto files and not every proto message; aggregation links has no cardinalities; overlapping visualization; basic datatypes are missing.

Resume: I think the diagrams are ok. If we want to change to UML diagrams we have no benefit.

@carsten-kuebler thank you very much for this detailled answer! I would then go with your recommendation and not support the change to UML. What do you think @pmai