use-case

I have trouble understanding how the include and the extend relationships work. Let's say i have an online application for shopping. The application allows you to add/retrieve items from your cart without being authenticated. Here is the "order" scenario: The client clicks on the order button. The system checks if the user is authenticated. If the user is authenticated the system displays the purchase page otherwise the user is redirected to the authentication page. I would like to know if i the "authentication" use case is included in the "order" use case and if so why ? (I'm asking this

I have developed an android application that communicates with a server. Through the application the user authenticates on the system that the server is running and after the server is able to send information to my application. I'm making a use case diagram (UML) for my application but I'm not sure if I should represent the server as an actor (external) or omit it from the diagram... I'm new in UML so the definitions are a little confusing to me at the moment... Can anyone help me with this? (Sorry if this is not the right place to put those kind of questions). First off, who is the diagram

Should a batch scheduled process (for example, a nightly process) be modeled as a Use Case? it is something the system should do, but there is not an Actor "using" the feature, because it is scheduled. Any suggestions? Thanks! We've defined a 'Scheduler' actor to model that scenario. The Scheduler usually has its own set of use cases which are batch jobs, or executables that need to run regularly, etc. For example, the Use Case can be written like "The Use Case begins when the current time is on the hour" for a job that runs 24 times a day. We try not to include too many of these cases because

Alright, on a true false question: a)The actors of a system are only represented by humans or another software components. I said TRUE, and the teacher marked it as wrong, not because he considered that I missed hardware components (which I guess I would partially concede), but because, on his words: "TIME is also an actor." How would an use case diagram consider TIME as an actor?? Please refer to any bibliography which considers time an actor. I haven't found any, and truthfully I don't think it makes any sense. Time doesn't act by itself, it's either a system or a person that works on a

UML Use Case Diagrams allow for two seemingly equivalent ways to show that a given use case might be realised in several different ways namely use case generalizations as opposed to use case extensions . I have seen the following basically example modelled using either approach with equal frequency, sometimes within a single source. To my mind an extension is a weaker relationship than generalization as a direct substitution of the specialised use case for the base case must be possible in generalization but not necessarily in extensions. It seems to me that generalisation implies a

I'd like to make a picture of what are the possible cases for effective involvement of AOP in application design. All I have met so far is: logging-related security checks transaction management tweaking of a legacy application Anything else? (It doesn't have to be necessarily Spring's proxy based AOP - rather JBoss AOP.) ( Related question ) I can give you two examples where we use it: Automatically registering objects in JMX for remote management. If a class is annotated with our @AutoRegister annotation, we have an aspect that watches for new instantiations of that class and registers them