The following is a list of UML programs. ==Free/open source programs== *ArgoUml *Dia - a diagramming tool that also supports UML *Eclipse Modeling Framework [http://download.eclipse.org/tools/emf/scripts/home.php] - for GNOME *Fujaba [http://wwwcs.uni-paderborn.de/cs/fujaba/] - UML and Java development platform; eclipse version available *Gaphor [http://gaphor.sourceforge.net] *JUDE [http://jude.esm.jp/] *MonoUML [http://www.monouml.org/] *Umbrello UML modeler [http://uml.sf.net] - part of KDE *UMLet [http://www.umlet.com] - in Java *UMLpad [http://web.tiscali.it/ggbhome/umlpad/umlpad.htm] *UniMod [http://unimod.sf.net] - executable UML for Eclipse *Violet (UML editor) [http://horstmann.com/violet] ==Proprietary programs== *Altova UModel 2005 [http://www.altova.com/products_umodel.html] - a simple, cost effective way to draw on UML *Borland Together [http://www.borland.com/together/] *Cadifra UML Editor - a lightweight UML diagram editor for Windows *DotNet2UML *Enterprise Architect (UML Tool) [http://www.sparxsystems.com/] *Jude (UML Tool) *Jumli [http://www.jumli.de] - in Java *MagicDraw UML [http://www.magicdraw.com] - a visual UML modeling and CASE tool *Microsoft Visio - a diagramming tool that also supports UML *Objecteering/UML [http://www.objecteering.com] *OmniGraffle - for Mac OS X *Omondo UML [http://www.omondo.com] - an Eclipse plugin *Poseidon for UML [http://www.gentleware.com] - commercial version of ArgoUml *Rhapsody (UML) [http://www.ilogix.com] - for real time, embedded applications *Rational Rose *System Architect [http://www.popkin.com/products/system_architect.htm] *Unimodeler [http://www.unimodeler.com] *Visual Paradigm [http://www.visual-paradigm.com] ==See also== *Unified Modeling Language *List of diagramming software ==External links== *[http://www.cetus-links.org/oo_ooa_ood_tools.html Cetus Links: OOA/OOD Tools] (no longer maintained, as of 17:57, 2005 May 14 (UTC)). *[http://dmoz.org/Computers/Programming/Methodologies/Modeling_Languages/Unified_Modeling_Language/Tools/ List of UML tools] at Dmoz. *[http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~migod/uml.html "My Little UML Page"] by [http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~migod/ Michael W. Godfrey PhD] (Professor at University of Waterloo). *[http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools/umltools_byPlatform.html Objects by Design: UML Modeling Tools], sorted by Platform. Software engineering Technical communication Lists of software
== Creating an article "Comparison of UML programs" == I vote not to create an article "Comparison of UML programs", as it is unclear under what aspects and how UML programs should be compared and whether Wikipedia is the right place for such a comparison (or comparisons). I further vote not to add an internal link to this nonexistent article on each and every individual UML programs article - at least not until there *is* such a comparison article. I think, one link on the list article here to this nonexistent comparison article and a back link to the list article on each program's article is enough. User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:29, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC) :Since I absolutely agree with your arguments, I've removed the link to this nonexistant article for now, until someone comes along and convinces me otherwise. --User:S.K. 18:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Removing or not removing external links of products with a separate article == I vote not to remove external links of products, even if they have a separate article. I find it useful to have a complete uniform list with all products *together* with their external links. If I like, I can have open the article List of UML programs in one browser window and open each product external home page in a second browser window, product by product. The external URL of each product also can serve as some form of unique identifier, what exact product is meant by a certain entry in this list here. The info in this list here is already stripped down to the near absolute minimum. I think we should not exaggerate. Please leave the links. I think they do not hurt. User:Adrian Buehlmann 12:45, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC) :Too much links hinder reading. Reverted. --User:Minghong 14:18, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::It seems to me that User:Minghong wants to decide alone, ignoring contributions from others. I disagree with most of what he did, especially with his "cleanup" (removing short infos about programs on this page, thereby urging to create new articles). His cleanup lead to other new articles, which are already accused of being pure advertisements by others. As I do not engage in pointless edit wars, I hereby resign. Best regards, User:Adrian Buehlmann 08:58, 2005 Apr 26 (UTC) :::That's the point! A product without an article is probably not worth mentioning (not a notable product) anyway... I don't think this is bad. In fact, I think this encourage contributor to say more about the product, instead of just link spamming (advertising, SEO, etc) the software lists. --User:Minghong 05:18, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::::Creating lots of links to nonexisting articles paves the way for pure advertisement pages. Product "spammers" (like me?) just have to click on the corresponding internal link and paste in their marketing bla bla. But how do we distinct "marketing bla bla" from a wikipedia-worthy product descriptions? The description should be neutral. If I write "fast and lightweight" for Cadifra UML Editor people quickly think I'm not neutral, because everybody wants to claim his product to be fast. But if fast and lightweight was really a key development focus of our product, what can I do? Have you seen another UML diagram editor that fits on a single diskette? Theses days there are UML tool monsters that weigh in for 100MB or more. Back to the article: I find short descriptions on the list article here much better than pressing each product author to create a separate article facing the "advertisement" claims afterwards. You write "wikipedia is not dmoz" - ok fine. But what should the informational content difference between this list here and dmoz be? Why can't we just write a few words about each product here, and an external link to the product homepage. For those that want to write a separate article for their product, it's of course ok to create that article and link to that. But there are products that don't need a separate article but are still worth noting here on the list. I feel User:Minghong has a bit too much fear for link spam. Honestly listing one's product with a short straight text description is not prima facie "link spam". And one notable difference between dmoz and wikipedia is, that on wikipedia there ''should'' be no page "administrator", no censorship. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 09:04, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC) :::::Alright... I'll add back those short description. --User:Minghong 11:24, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::::::You added back only partway. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:28, 2005 May 5 (UTC) :As an example, the article List of wiki software has lots of entries with both internal links to ''existing'' articles ''and'' external links ''at the same entry''. May I ask a question to User:Minghong: Do you intend to remove those external links on entries where an article exists on the article List of wiki software? If not, at least, this would be inconsistent with what you stipulate here. (This is nothing personal against you, just something I would like to kindly point out, as you are working on several of these software lists). -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 18:13, 2005 May 6 (UTC) == Using unnamed external links == Should we really ignore the Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page#Links_and_URLs, which says that ''unnamed'' external links are considered very bad style? -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 21:32, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC) :* ''Addendum'': it is User:Minghong who wants those links to be unnamed. He quickly reverts anything else. Discussion seems pointless. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:45, 2005 May 5 (UTC) :* List of integrated development environments is not consistent with this article here regarding external links (as imposed by User:Minghong here) as they are named there! Although User:Minghong apparently did some edits there too. Hmmm. minghong, did you fail there imposing your style? -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 18:17, 2005 May 5 (UTC) ::Stop going personal. P.S. if you check out the history, it was me who moved the article from "Integrated development environment software" to "List of integrated development environments" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Integrated_development_environment_software&action=history]. I didn't clean up the article yet. That's why the style is inconsistent. --User:Minghong 10:03, 6 May 2005 (UTC) :::Aha, you didn't clean up yet. Please accept that I oppose to your style of "cleaning up". I have nothing personal against you. If it bothers you that I keep insisting with my disagreement, please do not take that personal. What I strongly dislike of your style is that you consistently ignore discussions and especially careful consideration of arguments and just go for your edits/deletions. And please accept that I am somewhat astonished about the great speed and vigour with what you revert anything deviative from your personal style in this article ''here'' while thereis are obviously another other article articles where you havent imposed your style yet. That's all. Maybe ''you'' are the one taking it personal that someone (me) opposes your "cleanups" here. And you still haven't made a statement about my argument that unnamed external links are considered bad style (see reference above) -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 13:03, 2005 May 6 (UTC), ''updated 10:11, 2005 May 7 (UTC)''
== External link to Visio Stencil for UML 2.0 by Pavel Hruby ==
It does not make sense to add the link to Pavel's popular Stencil to the Visio article and removing it here. Visio has hundreds if not thousands of Stencils. Pavel's UML Stencils have been well known and have been in use for a long time already, also by well known experts in the field like [http://www.objectmentor.com/aboutUs/bios/Robert%20C.%20Martin Robert C. Martin]. Visio is not an UML program without the corresponding stencil. I would recommend that people who know something about the field contribute to this article here and that others do some investigation to learn a bit about what we are writing here. This would help understanding in weighting contributions to this article. The form alone is not the key point of this article. Content is more important. User:Adrian Buehlmann 12:49, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
:Don't pollute the list. Keep the list nice and simple. What make Pavel's templates so special that it has to be listed here? Your explanation above is clearly POV. Why is Visio so special that we have to list everything related to Visio here? This doesn't make sense. There are over 20 programs here. We shouldn't be biased toward Visio. --User:Minghong 09:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
::I do not see why listing Pavels Stencil "pollutes" this list. And this isn't POV (I assume you mean Wikipedia:POV). There are well known professionals that use Pavel's Stencils. Pavel's Stencil is the only UML Stencil for Visio which is free ''and'' in common use. It does not pollute the list, if we mention the stencil here. And by they way: Do you mean that only "special" programs should be listed here? (If yes, I disagree.) If so, can you list the criteria for being ''special''? The title of the article is "List of UML programs" - not censored list of UML programs or list of special UML programs. Pavel's Stencil turn Visio into an UML diagram program, so that merits listing it here. By the way, I do not have any personal benefit if Pavel's Stencil is listed here. I find, if we list it here, we increase the quality of this article by completing the information. By the way, Pavel is not a nobody. I suspect you are biased against this contribution because it's an external link. I also suspect that you are biased against external links per se because, maybe, you feel that nearly every external link is for SEO only. But that isn't true. At another place you wrote ''wikipedia is not dmoz''. We haven't reached consensus on this point either. Could you please explain why listing pavel's stencil ''pollutes'' this list? Couldn't it be that suppressing listing it is ''your'' POV? And what are your criteria for this list beeing ''nice''. Isn't that POV either? And what is your definition of ''simple'' - does that mean that we only can make additions to this article that ''pass your POV test for simplicity''? User:Adrian Buehlmann 14:46, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
:::You clearly understood my point. Every entry here should be treated equally. There is no special treatment. Therefore Visio shouldn't be treated specially (allow it to mess up the page). Take a look of the article title. It is "List of UML programs". Visio stencil is clearly not a program. Reader interested in Visio-specific information should follow the link and go to the Visio article to read more. --User:Minghong 15:59, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
::::Wrong. I completely disagree. You are suppressing me, adding valid information to this article, because it does not fit your personal style. And you haven't answered any of my questions. I do not see how a link to the stencil can ''mess'' up the page. By the way: you haven't contributed anything to this article so far. You are just deleting, suppressing in your opinion misfitting content. This is nothing else than censorship, because you ignore others opinions. It is downright ridiculous to designate this link I added as an advertisement - as you did in the edit summary (Did you see that the stencil is is free?). I will stop here and let you go. Congratulations. I hereby resign. Go ahead. User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:13, 2005 May 5 (UTC)
:::::Contributation doesn't only include addition, it also include article maintenance, categorization, etc. This is not the only one article I care, see my Special:Contributions/Minghong. I think you should take a wider look of Wikipedia. Don't just concentrating on the area of UML tool. --User:Minghong 09:58, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
:::::: And you forgot deletion. And yes, I ''took'' a wider look of Wikipedia. For example I have read Wikipedia:Revert (found on Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines) which states ''Being reverted can feel a bit like a slap in the face'' (I admit: I sometimes had that feeling here). And ''A nice thing to do is to drop the note on the Talk page first, and then revert, rather than the other way round. Sometimes the other person will agree with you and revert for you before you have a chance.'' Or what about Wikipedia:Be_bold_in_updating_pages#...but_don.27t_be_reckless.21 on deletions: ''List your objections on the Talk page, but leave the main article as is'' ... ''Then, wait a bit for responses''. And yes, I have taken a look at other lists of software and found that List of integrated development environments uses ''named'' external links, which I find superior, but which you do not want here (see other discussion point on this talk page) -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 15:58, 2005 May 6 (UTC)
==Should we Vfd?==
Maybe this list is too broad: it covers everything related to UML, making comparison not possible/meaningless. UML is just one of the many ways of expressing idea. We should list the software according to the genre, not the technologies supported. e.g. We don't have "List of RSS programs", but we do have "List of news aggregators". Perhaps this article shouldn't exist. The software here should be listed in somewhere like "List of diagramming software", "List of code generation software", "List of code synthesis software", etc.
What do you all think? If no one object, I'm going to do that. --User:Minghong 10:15, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
:Oppose. Please do not delete/split this article. This list corresponds to the article Unified Modeling Language. It is correct that the full process of UML has some controversies, especially the automatic generation of code from model data. Nevertheless the graphic notation of the UML diagrams is widely accepted and there is industry wide consensus to use it over older previously competing notations. But people do study UML and they do think how far they should use the UML. And for that purpose it is helpful to have an article listing programs supporting some degree of UML. A "List of code generation software" would not be helpful. This would be list-inflationary. It would also be hard to categorize UML software because the degree of support for several aspects of the UML process (diagramming, code generation, reverse engineering) varies largely. And there are even other aspects. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 12:47, 2005 May 6 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with List_of_UML_programs:
List_of_UML_programs
List_of_UML_programs
List of UML programs
The following is a list of UML programs. ==Free/open source programs== *ArgoUml *Dia - a diagramming tool that also supports UML *Eclipse Modeling Framework [http://download.eclipse.org/tools/emf/scripts/home.php] - for GNOME *Fujaba [http://wwwcs.uni-paderborn.de/cs/fujaba/] - UML and Java development platform; eclipse version available *Gaphor [http://gaphor.sourceforge.net] *JUDE [http://jude.esm.jp/] *MonoUML [http://www.monouml.org/] *Umbrello UML modeler [http://uml.sf.net] - part of KDE *UMLet [http://www.umlet.com] - in Java *UMLpad [http://web.tiscali.it/ggbhome/umlpad/umlpad.htm] *UniMod [http://unimod.sf.net] - executable UML for Eclipse *Violet (UML editor) [http://horstmann.com/violet] ==Proprietary programs== *Altova UModel 2005 [http://www.altova.com/products_umodel.html] - a simple, cost effective way to draw on UML *Borland Together [http://www.borland.com/together/] *Cadifra UML Editor - a lightweight UML diagram editor for Windows *DotNet2UML *Enterprise Architect (UML Tool) [http://www.sparxsystems.com/] *Jude (UML Tool) *Jumli [http://www.jumli.de] - in Java *MagicDraw UML [http://www.magicdraw.com] - a visual UML modeling and CASE tool *Microsoft Visio - a diagramming tool that also supports UML *Objecteering/UML [http://www.objecteering.com] *OmniGraffle - for Mac OS X *Omondo UML [http://www.omondo.com] - an Eclipse plugin *Poseidon for UML [http://www.gentleware.com] - commercial version of ArgoUml *Rhapsody (UML) [http://www.ilogix.com] - for real time, embedded applications *Rational Rose *System Architect [http://www.popkin.com/products/system_architect.htm] *Unimodeler [http://www.unimodeler.com] *Visual Paradigm [http://www.visual-paradigm.com] ==See also== *Unified Modeling Language *List of diagramming software ==External links== *[http://www.cetus-links.org/oo_ooa_ood_tools.html Cetus Links: OOA/OOD Tools] (no longer maintained, as of 17:57, 2005 May 14 (UTC)). *[http://dmoz.org/Computers/Programming/Methodologies/Modeling_Languages/Unified_Modeling_Language/Tools/ List of UML tools] at Dmoz. *[http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~migod/uml.html "My Little UML Page"] by [http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~migod/ Michael W. Godfrey PhD] (Professor at University of Waterloo). *[http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools/umltools_byPlatform.html Objects by Design: UML Modeling Tools], sorted by Platform. Software engineering Technical communication Lists of software
List of UML programs
== Creating an article "Comparison of UML programs" == I vote not to create an article "Comparison of UML programs", as it is unclear under what aspects and how UML programs should be compared and whether Wikipedia is the right place for such a comparison (or comparisons). I further vote not to add an internal link to this nonexistent article on each and every individual UML programs article - at least not until there *is* such a comparison article. I think, one link on the list article here to this nonexistent comparison article and a back link to the list article on each program's article is enough. User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:29, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC) :Since I absolutely agree with your arguments, I've removed the link to this nonexistant article for now, until someone comes along and convinces me otherwise. --User:S.K. 18:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Removing or not removing external links of products with a separate article == I vote not to remove external links of products, even if they have a separate article. I find it useful to have a complete uniform list with all products *together* with their external links. If I like, I can have open the article List of UML programs in one browser window and open each product external home page in a second browser window, product by product. The external URL of each product also can serve as some form of unique identifier, what exact product is meant by a certain entry in this list here. The info in this list here is already stripped down to the near absolute minimum. I think we should not exaggerate. Please leave the links. I think they do not hurt. User:Adrian Buehlmann 12:45, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC) :Too much links hinder reading. Reverted. --User:Minghong 14:18, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::It seems to me that User:Minghong wants to decide alone, ignoring contributions from others. I disagree with most of what he did, especially with his "cleanup" (removing short infos about programs on this page, thereby urging to create new articles). His cleanup lead to other new articles, which are already accused of being pure advertisements by others. As I do not engage in pointless edit wars, I hereby resign. Best regards, User:Adrian Buehlmann 08:58, 2005 Apr 26 (UTC) :::That's the point! A product without an article is probably not worth mentioning (not a notable product) anyway... I don't think this is bad. In fact, I think this encourage contributor to say more about the product, instead of just link spamming (advertising, SEO, etc) the software lists. --User:Minghong 05:18, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::::Creating lots of links to nonexisting articles paves the way for pure advertisement pages. Product "spammers" (like me?) just have to click on the corresponding internal link and paste in their marketing bla bla. But how do we distinct "marketing bla bla" from a wikipedia-worthy product descriptions? The description should be neutral. If I write "fast and lightweight" for Cadifra UML Editor people quickly think I'm not neutral, because everybody wants to claim his product to be fast. But if fast and lightweight was really a key development focus of our product, what can I do? Have you seen another UML diagram editor that fits on a single diskette? Theses days there are UML tool monsters that weigh in for 100MB or more. Back to the article: I find short descriptions on the list article here much better than pressing each product author to create a separate article facing the "advertisement" claims afterwards. You write "wikipedia is not dmoz" - ok fine. But what should the informational content difference between this list here and dmoz be? Why can't we just write a few words about each product here, and an external link to the product homepage. For those that want to write a separate article for their product, it's of course ok to create that article and link to that. But there are products that don't need a separate article but are still worth noting here on the list. I feel User:Minghong has a bit too much fear for link spam. Honestly listing one's product with a short straight text description is not prima facie "link spam". And one notable difference between dmoz and wikipedia is, that on wikipedia there ''should'' be no page "administrator", no censorship. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 09:04, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC) :::::Alright... I'll add back those short description. --User:Minghong 11:24, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::::::You added back only partway. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:28, 2005 May 5 (UTC) :As an example, the article List of wiki software has lots of entries with both internal links to ''existing'' articles ''and'' external links ''at the same entry''. May I ask a question to User:Minghong: Do you intend to remove those external links on entries where an article exists on the article List of wiki software? If not, at least, this would be inconsistent with what you stipulate here. (This is nothing personal against you, just something I would like to kindly point out, as you are working on several of these software lists). -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 18:13, 2005 May 6 (UTC) == Using unnamed external links == Should we really ignore the Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page#Links_and_URLs, which says that ''unnamed'' external links are considered very bad style? -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 21:32, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC) :* ''Addendum'': it is User:Minghong who wants those links to be unnamed. He quickly reverts anything else. Discussion seems pointless. -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 17:45, 2005 May 5 (UTC) :* List of integrated development environments is not consistent with this article here regarding external links (as imposed by User:Minghong here) as they are named there! Although User:Minghong apparently did some edits there too. Hmmm. minghong, did you fail there imposing your style? -- User:Adrian Buehlmann 18:17, 2005 May 5 (UTC) ::Stop going personal. P.S. if you check out the history, it was me who moved the article from "Integrated development environment software" to "List of integrated development environments" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Integrated_development_environment_software&action=history]. I didn't clean up the article yet. That's why the style is inconsistent. --User:Minghong 10:03, 6 May 2005 (UTC) :::Aha, you didn't clean up yet. Please accept that I oppose to your style of "cleaning up". I have nothing personal against you. If it bothers you that I keep insisting with my disagreement, please do not take that personal. What I strongly dislike of your style is that you consistently ignore discussions and especially careful consideration of arguments and just go for your edits/deletions. And please accept that I am somewhat astonished about the great speed and vigour with what you revert anything deviative from your personal style in this article ''here'' while there
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
L
LA | LB | LC | LD | LE | LF | LG | LH | LI | LJ | LK | LM | LN | LO | LP | LR | LS | LT | LU | LW | LX | LY | LZ |Words begining with List_of_UML_programs:
List_of_UML_programs
List_of_UML_programs
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
