This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
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).Well, I think we need to talk about UML programs in detail a little more. 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. Adrian Buehlmann 17:29, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
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. Adrian Buehlmann 12:45, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
I arrived here having followed a vandal. There are several policies that indicate that lists like this should only include articles, not links to external sites. I will be cleaning up this list shortly unless someone can show a policy to the contrary. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 14:00, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
I would add (or re-add) Artisan Studio from Atego. This is the major UK tool. It is the leader in UK (and probably in all of Europe), and is significantly active in the OMG standards community. The tool is actively maintained, and supports UPDM (for MODAF) and SysML.
Astah* ---> Astah.
IBM Rational Software Modeler (from IBM): This tool was important historically, but was withdrawn from marketing in 2010, and IBM has several replacements StarUML: Probably hasn't been active since 2005. RISE: It's primarily an ER tool, though it does allow UML Class Diagrams. I wouldn't call this a UML tool.
Can you make the above changes?
Also, are you active in the UML community or know much about it? I would think you would need to be very knowledgeable to understand whether a tool like Astah (the biggest UML tool in Japan) is a notable tool. Certainly its article is pretty bad. I would partially use the criteria if the company is active in determining the direction of UML or has significant market share in some community. Mjchonoles ( talk) 15:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Should we really ignore the recommendation about external links, which says that unnamed external links are considered very bad style? -- Adrian Buehlmann 21:32, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)
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 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. Adrian Buehlmann 12:49, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
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. -- minghong 10:15, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
I could not verify that JUDE is Free Software
Then shouldn't it be on the proprietary software list?
The site does not mention if blueprint is Free Software or Open Source. Please try downloading it and install it to see whether there is a README file or a EULA that indicates its status
I've been doing UML tool investigations for many years. No one ever call them "UML Programs". It's always "UML Tools". I would like to change this. Mjchonoles 04:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Also at my last count, there were over 150 of these UML Tools available, but the list of tools and their webwsites, even their Open Source status change very rapidly. Do we really want a list that so long and volatile? Mjchonoles 04:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
The correct spelling of the name of this program, as given in all its documentation, is ArgoUML. I wasn't sure about the implications on linking if the name of the page was changed, so I didn't do any edits, but would appreciate it if someone could make the change.
While it is technically difficult to determine whether a tool has full support of UML 2.0 (mainly because OMG has not yet come up with a certification suite), for a tool to be mentioned as supporting UML 2.0, it should
At this point, Poseidon does not offer a UML 2.0 tool. They do support some of the UML 2.0 interchange capabilibities and the UML 2.0 sequence diagrams, but they do not yet offer the rest of the diagrams, nor do they yet claim full support for UML 2.0. I'm sure that they will soon qualify. Mjchonoles 17:16, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
May I ask: what has this to do with UML? I could not find the term "UML" nor "Unified Modeling Language" on any of the html pages where the external link points to. (Just thinking if that might fit better somewhere else) – Adrian | Talk 22:21, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Template:Dmoz has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Dmoz. Thank you. Adrian Buehlmann 15:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I would argue that the following should be rmed from the list as non-notable, in approximate order of how strongly I think they should be rmed:
Removal is not a judgement on the quality of a piece of software--only of notability. Inclusion in this list doesn't mean I don't like you or your product. Exclusion from the list doesn't mean I do, nor that your product is actually notable -- I might have just missed you.-- Karnesky 01:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion; the result was keep (following revisions). For details, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of UML tools. bd2412 T 19:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Honestly, the extra comments next to the links are ridiculous... MagicDraw's comments go over one line describing functionality that Sparx Enterprise Architect has as well, but it only says "supports UML 2.0". Can we get some consistency? Bihal 06:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted the removal of all external links by by GraemeL. These links are not linkspam. If we keep just those links where we have an article, people will start again creating articles for each tool, which is not wanted either. If we accept only a limited number of tools, we have to choose which ones. If we would do this, we would violate WP:NPOV. If we delete this page, UML tools will be added again to UML tool or Unified Modeling Language, a situation we already had. It's much better to have a separate tool list. -- Ligulem 23:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Seems to be an overly reactive approach to not being able to solve an editing dispute with Graemel. The list is useful and gives users a needed idea of the extent and penetration of UML market. Simple descriptions of the UML tools are needed to understand the specialization / fractionalization forces that are in play in the tool marketplace
In addition, we've already had a vfd here, and it failed. Let's not do this again and again. Mjchonoles 14:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
There are again many external links in the article, I added a cleanup tag. As list inclusion criteria I suggest to keep only entries with wikipedia article (as notability filter). - 62.127.211.2 ( talk) 08:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the misplaced external links per WP:MOS, specifically, Wikipedia:Linking#Position_in_article. The majority of IPs here appear to be promoting their UML tools. Toddst1 ( talk) 15:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
this is such a hot topic, so I'll just suggest to remove the links to pages and forums which are old and updated or they don't have any information at all this is a good candidate http://www.uml-forum.com/tools.htm - just nine tools and there aren't post on the forum. This link was deleted too in UML wikipedia page.
The others links I think are ok. (it appears to be ok IMHO, but I have some doubts Id recommend to take a look) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aludstartups ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Considerations on new tools? Specifically Architexa? How to go about an introduction, and what's required? Nhbaldwin ( talk) 21:08, 19 April 2011 (UTC)nhbaldwin 19 April 2011
I am new to editing wikipedia, and so I didn't edit the actual page. Among the tools that I've tried, I found two (both open source) very helpful:
http://www.spinellis.gr/sw/umlgraph/ - a javadoc tool run from the command line (as taken from the docs:) "javadoc -docletpath UmlGraph.jar -doclet gr.spinellis.umlgraph.doclet.UmlGraph -private Simple.java dot -Tps -ograph" It Generates UML class diagrams and sequence diagrams for documentation purposes. I found it very powerful and fun to explore.
http://green.sourceforge.net/ - a "LIVE round-tripping editor" which is great for generating UML models of existing code, but I don't think it is stable or accurate enough for development projects yet.
TheConfusedOne 11:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
JBuilder 2007 Enterprise also contains UML functionality. ( http://www.codegear.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=xBaUV4%2byCA0%3d&tabid=102&mid=533)
I found a UML tool not on the list: UMLet
jj5 ( talk) 14:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
No one has put up anything pointing to Metamill, http://www.metamill.com, which I am not associated with, but looks like a running product based on what I've seen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.137.244.16 ( talk) 03:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
There is a lot of information in this list, and it's really not very helpful. This really needs to get rewritten as a table, similar to Comparison_of_accounting_software. There has been some talk as to what information is important. I'd recommend: Name, Developer, Platform (Win/OSX/Linux), License (FOSS/Proprietary, etc), UML Support (1, 2, etc), Code Generation support (from diagram), Diagram Generation support (from code), brief description. Anything else can and should go in their pages. When that is finished, it may also be a good idea to rename this page "Comparison of UML Tools". David Souther ( talk) 14:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The "latest stable version" column of the comparison table should not contain version numbers, as these mean nothing in comparison to each other. Instead, it should contain a date (as in the "First public release" column). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.102.219.26 ( talk) 23:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not want to cause controversy where it is not needed, but someone please rearrange this article to make the distinction between Free and Free more clear.
What I mean is, Free Software is not necessarily non-commercial, and Non-commercial software is not necessarily Free. Thus, grouping the two in the same category - particularly when it seems to oppose commercial/proprietary (also in a single category); this is clearly incorrect.
The edit should be to simply remove the second categorisation (free/proprietary) as, even if you don't agree with my definition of these words, you must agree that the definition is disputed. I didn't make the edit myself because of its controversial nature, and because I don't count myself as a Wikipedia editor (heck, I don't even count myself as a Wikipedia user).
Thank you.
--
Yoda (
talk) 21:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
OpenAmeos is missing - since I just found it, I do not know whether it is usable or relevant at all. But the authors say it was "the multi-platform/multi-user UML® Modeling Environment". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.195.55.53 ( talk) 09:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Change Vision JUDE has been renamed and/or superceded by astah*. Since JUDE has been EOL'ed, it is no longer noteworthy; therefore we should replace it with a reference to "astah*". The licensing model of astah* appears to be similar to or identical to the licensing model of JUDE, with the community (feature limited) version being unlimited-use freeware, and requiring commercial licenses to unlock all the features. I didn't make this change because I am not really an experienced editor and I wanted to solicit feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allquixotic ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
What does the app have to have for it to be MDA-compatible?? I find this very subjective and it really is not clear atm what the apps can do if they have a yes there. Code generation? Modeling is enough? -- Kissaki ( talk) 13:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
eUML2 -- Achyuth ( talk) 18:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.45.7.162 ( talk)
As it is said in the TODO list, this section should be merged into the two other sections. It should have been for a long time ago. I have already merged what I can. If nothing changes, I will remove this inappropriate section in a month. Ftiercel ( talk) 20:10, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Can it be explained somewhat, rather than just thrown in there? -- Jerome Potts ( talk) 23:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Please add this tool: http://umlfri.org/screen.php (It has been creating for several yrs now) then you can delete this, thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.28.75.199 ( talk) 10:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
It has been my understanding this list is like list of GUI testing tools or list of web testing tools where all entries have an article and hence do not become a WP:COATRACK for everything. Or is it to be like list of unit testing frameworks which focuses on being comprehensive?
See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists Walter Görlitz ( talk) 17:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
I recently made an edit to this page by adding "Integrity Modeler" to the General table. I then read some authoring guidelines and realised I should not have directly edited the page as I work for PTC, who develops Integrity Modeler, and therefore I have a COI. Please undo/revert my changes if needed.
I would like to request that Integrity Modeler is added to the article, specifically to the 2 tables. Information can be found on the PTC website. There is an independent review available here: https://www.ptc.com/en/application-lifecycle-management/integrity-modeler-independent-review
Integrity Modeler does not have it's own dedicated page yet (I will request), but is part of the Integrity "family" of products which does have a page called "PTC Integrity". Pjo1945 ( talk) 08:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, as far as I understand this list, a tool needs to have an wiki article = being worth to be reported about it in the first place. Do different wiki languages account for? My company did some internal evaluation if this one https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovator_(Software) is worth to be used. And it seems this software has quite some history and also being available in English. Thanks for your time. -- 2A02:2455:A63:8100:B538:C4A5:3F58:D2D5 ( talk) 17:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
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).Well, I think we need to talk about UML programs in detail a little more. 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. Adrian Buehlmann 17:29, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)
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. Adrian Buehlmann 12:45, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
I arrived here having followed a vandal. There are several policies that indicate that lists like this should only include articles, not links to external sites. I will be cleaning up this list shortly unless someone can show a policy to the contrary. -- Walter Görlitz ( talk) 14:00, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
I would add (or re-add) Artisan Studio from Atego. This is the major UK tool. It is the leader in UK (and probably in all of Europe), and is significantly active in the OMG standards community. The tool is actively maintained, and supports UPDM (for MODAF) and SysML.
Astah* ---> Astah.
IBM Rational Software Modeler (from IBM): This tool was important historically, but was withdrawn from marketing in 2010, and IBM has several replacements StarUML: Probably hasn't been active since 2005. RISE: It's primarily an ER tool, though it does allow UML Class Diagrams. I wouldn't call this a UML tool.
Can you make the above changes?
Also, are you active in the UML community or know much about it? I would think you would need to be very knowledgeable to understand whether a tool like Astah (the biggest UML tool in Japan) is a notable tool. Certainly its article is pretty bad. I would partially use the criteria if the company is active in determining the direction of UML or has significant market share in some community. Mjchonoles ( talk) 15:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Should we really ignore the recommendation about external links, which says that unnamed external links are considered very bad style? -- Adrian Buehlmann 21:32, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)
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 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. Adrian Buehlmann 12:49, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
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. -- minghong 10:15, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
I could not verify that JUDE is Free Software
Then shouldn't it be on the proprietary software list?
The site does not mention if blueprint is Free Software or Open Source. Please try downloading it and install it to see whether there is a README file or a EULA that indicates its status
I've been doing UML tool investigations for many years. No one ever call them "UML Programs". It's always "UML Tools". I would like to change this. Mjchonoles 04:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
Also at my last count, there were over 150 of these UML Tools available, but the list of tools and their webwsites, even their Open Source status change very rapidly. Do we really want a list that so long and volatile? Mjchonoles 04:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
The correct spelling of the name of this program, as given in all its documentation, is ArgoUML. I wasn't sure about the implications on linking if the name of the page was changed, so I didn't do any edits, but would appreciate it if someone could make the change.
While it is technically difficult to determine whether a tool has full support of UML 2.0 (mainly because OMG has not yet come up with a certification suite), for a tool to be mentioned as supporting UML 2.0, it should
At this point, Poseidon does not offer a UML 2.0 tool. They do support some of the UML 2.0 interchange capabilibities and the UML 2.0 sequence diagrams, but they do not yet offer the rest of the diagrams, nor do they yet claim full support for UML 2.0. I'm sure that they will soon qualify. Mjchonoles 17:16, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
May I ask: what has this to do with UML? I could not find the term "UML" nor "Unified Modeling Language" on any of the html pages where the external link points to. (Just thinking if that might fit better somewhere else) – Adrian | Talk 22:21, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Template:Dmoz has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Dmoz. Thank you. Adrian Buehlmann 15:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I would argue that the following should be rmed from the list as non-notable, in approximate order of how strongly I think they should be rmed:
Removal is not a judgement on the quality of a piece of software--only of notability. Inclusion in this list doesn't mean I don't like you or your product. Exclusion from the list doesn't mean I do, nor that your product is actually notable -- I might have just missed you.-- Karnesky 01:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion; the result was keep (following revisions). For details, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of UML tools. bd2412 T 19:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Honestly, the extra comments next to the links are ridiculous... MagicDraw's comments go over one line describing functionality that Sparx Enterprise Architect has as well, but it only says "supports UML 2.0". Can we get some consistency? Bihal 06:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted the removal of all external links by by GraemeL. These links are not linkspam. If we keep just those links where we have an article, people will start again creating articles for each tool, which is not wanted either. If we accept only a limited number of tools, we have to choose which ones. If we would do this, we would violate WP:NPOV. If we delete this page, UML tools will be added again to UML tool or Unified Modeling Language, a situation we already had. It's much better to have a separate tool list. -- Ligulem 23:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Seems to be an overly reactive approach to not being able to solve an editing dispute with Graemel. The list is useful and gives users a needed idea of the extent and penetration of UML market. Simple descriptions of the UML tools are needed to understand the specialization / fractionalization forces that are in play in the tool marketplace
In addition, we've already had a vfd here, and it failed. Let's not do this again and again. Mjchonoles 14:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
There are again many external links in the article, I added a cleanup tag. As list inclusion criteria I suggest to keep only entries with wikipedia article (as notability filter). - 62.127.211.2 ( talk) 08:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the misplaced external links per WP:MOS, specifically, Wikipedia:Linking#Position_in_article. The majority of IPs here appear to be promoting their UML tools. Toddst1 ( talk) 15:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
this is such a hot topic, so I'll just suggest to remove the links to pages and forums which are old and updated or they don't have any information at all this is a good candidate http://www.uml-forum.com/tools.htm - just nine tools and there aren't post on the forum. This link was deleted too in UML wikipedia page.
The others links I think are ok. (it appears to be ok IMHO, but I have some doubts Id recommend to take a look) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aludstartups ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Considerations on new tools? Specifically Architexa? How to go about an introduction, and what's required? Nhbaldwin ( talk) 21:08, 19 April 2011 (UTC)nhbaldwin 19 April 2011
I am new to editing wikipedia, and so I didn't edit the actual page. Among the tools that I've tried, I found two (both open source) very helpful:
http://www.spinellis.gr/sw/umlgraph/ - a javadoc tool run from the command line (as taken from the docs:) "javadoc -docletpath UmlGraph.jar -doclet gr.spinellis.umlgraph.doclet.UmlGraph -private Simple.java dot -Tps -ograph" It Generates UML class diagrams and sequence diagrams for documentation purposes. I found it very powerful and fun to explore.
http://green.sourceforge.net/ - a "LIVE round-tripping editor" which is great for generating UML models of existing code, but I don't think it is stable or accurate enough for development projects yet.
TheConfusedOne 11:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
JBuilder 2007 Enterprise also contains UML functionality. ( http://www.codegear.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=xBaUV4%2byCA0%3d&tabid=102&mid=533)
I found a UML tool not on the list: UMLet
jj5 ( talk) 14:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
No one has put up anything pointing to Metamill, http://www.metamill.com, which I am not associated with, but looks like a running product based on what I've seen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.137.244.16 ( talk) 03:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
There is a lot of information in this list, and it's really not very helpful. This really needs to get rewritten as a table, similar to Comparison_of_accounting_software. There has been some talk as to what information is important. I'd recommend: Name, Developer, Platform (Win/OSX/Linux), License (FOSS/Proprietary, etc), UML Support (1, 2, etc), Code Generation support (from diagram), Diagram Generation support (from code), brief description. Anything else can and should go in their pages. When that is finished, it may also be a good idea to rename this page "Comparison of UML Tools". David Souther ( talk) 14:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The "latest stable version" column of the comparison table should not contain version numbers, as these mean nothing in comparison to each other. Instead, it should contain a date (as in the "First public release" column). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.102.219.26 ( talk) 23:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not want to cause controversy where it is not needed, but someone please rearrange this article to make the distinction between Free and Free more clear.
What I mean is, Free Software is not necessarily non-commercial, and Non-commercial software is not necessarily Free. Thus, grouping the two in the same category - particularly when it seems to oppose commercial/proprietary (also in a single category); this is clearly incorrect.
The edit should be to simply remove the second categorisation (free/proprietary) as, even if you don't agree with my definition of these words, you must agree that the definition is disputed. I didn't make the edit myself because of its controversial nature, and because I don't count myself as a Wikipedia editor (heck, I don't even count myself as a Wikipedia user).
Thank you.
--
Yoda (
talk) 21:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
OpenAmeos is missing - since I just found it, I do not know whether it is usable or relevant at all. But the authors say it was "the multi-platform/multi-user UML® Modeling Environment". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.195.55.53 ( talk) 09:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Change Vision JUDE has been renamed and/or superceded by astah*. Since JUDE has been EOL'ed, it is no longer noteworthy; therefore we should replace it with a reference to "astah*". The licensing model of astah* appears to be similar to or identical to the licensing model of JUDE, with the community (feature limited) version being unlimited-use freeware, and requiring commercial licenses to unlock all the features. I didn't make this change because I am not really an experienced editor and I wanted to solicit feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allquixotic ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
What does the app have to have for it to be MDA-compatible?? I find this very subjective and it really is not clear atm what the apps can do if they have a yes there. Code generation? Modeling is enough? -- Kissaki ( talk) 13:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
eUML2 -- Achyuth ( talk) 18:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.45.7.162 ( talk)
As it is said in the TODO list, this section should be merged into the two other sections. It should have been for a long time ago. I have already merged what I can. If nothing changes, I will remove this inappropriate section in a month. Ftiercel ( talk) 20:10, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Can it be explained somewhat, rather than just thrown in there? -- Jerome Potts ( talk) 23:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Please add this tool: http://umlfri.org/screen.php (It has been creating for several yrs now) then you can delete this, thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.28.75.199 ( talk) 10:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
It has been my understanding this list is like list of GUI testing tools or list of web testing tools where all entries have an article and hence do not become a WP:COATRACK for everything. Or is it to be like list of unit testing frameworks which focuses on being comprehensive?
See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists Walter Görlitz ( talk) 17:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
I recently made an edit to this page by adding "Integrity Modeler" to the General table. I then read some authoring guidelines and realised I should not have directly edited the page as I work for PTC, who develops Integrity Modeler, and therefore I have a COI. Please undo/revert my changes if needed.
I would like to request that Integrity Modeler is added to the article, specifically to the 2 tables. Information can be found on the PTC website. There is an independent review available here: https://www.ptc.com/en/application-lifecycle-management/integrity-modeler-independent-review
Integrity Modeler does not have it's own dedicated page yet (I will request), but is part of the Integrity "family" of products which does have a page called "PTC Integrity". Pjo1945 ( talk) 08:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, as far as I understand this list, a tool needs to have an wiki article = being worth to be reported about it in the first place. Do different wiki languages account for? My company did some internal evaluation if this one https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovator_(Software) is worth to be used. And it seems this software has quite some history and also being available in English. Thanks for your time. -- 2A02:2455:A63:8100:B538:C4A5:3F58:D2D5 ( talk) 17:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)