Fast Track UML 2.0

Rating:
Summary: A well-written, concise UML 2.0 Reference Manual
Review: As described on the back cover of the book, the target audience of Fast Track UML 2.0 includes folks with previous visual modeling knowledge, perhaps including UML 1.x experience. In the book, the author does not attempt to describe the differences between UML 2.0 and UML 1.x, or to point out the new features. Instead, in a content-packed 161 pages, Kendall, with a "fresh look" at UML 2.0, describes well what a typical developer would want to know about modeling with this improved language.

Normally, when a book's title tries to convey that it's going to teach me something "really fast" or "in just XX hours", I won't even pick it up. In this case, from reading a few of his previous books, I trusted that the author, Kendall Scott, had probably put together another good book worth reading, and he did.

I'm a mildly experienced developer with a bit of object-oriented analysis and design (OOAD) understanding. In this book, I was looking for something that would quickly bring me up to date with UML 2.0, while still serving as a good reference manual into the future, as I sit down for some fancy picture drawing, also known as visual modeling. This is that book.

I would definitely recommend this book to anyone looking for a well-written, easy to follow and understand, concise UML 2.0 reference manual. If you're a career designer, note that this book does not describe in full detail, the complete syntax of UML 2.0. That said, if you're drawing fancy pictures using syntax not described in Fast Track UML 2.0, then perhaps that's a sign that you're models are too detailed. If you're brand new to the study of OOAD looking to develop these skills, this book alone probably isn't what you're after, though it would still serve well as a supplement to another material geared towards teaching OOAD. As a bonus, the book is priced well.

Rating:
Summary: A well-written, concise UML 2.0 Reference Manual
Review: As described on the back cover of the book, the target audience of Fast Track UML 2.0 includes folks with previous visual modeling knowledge, perhaps including UML 1.x experience. In the book, the author does not attempt to describe the differences between UML 2.0 and UML 1.x, or to point out the new features. Instead, in a content-packed 161 pages, Kendall, with a "fresh look" at UML 2.0, describes well what a typical developer would want to know about modeling with this improved language.

Normally, when a book's title tries to convey that it's going to teach me something "really fast" or "in just XX hours", I won't even pick it up. In this case, from reading a few of his previous books, I trusted that the author, Kendall Scott, had probably put together another good book worth reading, and he did.

I'm a mildly experienced developer with a bit of object-oriented analysis and design (OOAD) understanding. In this book, I was looking for something that would quickly bring me up to date with UML 2.0, while still serving as a good reference manual into the future, as I sit down for some fancy picture drawing, also known as visual modeling. This is that book.

I would definitely recommend this book to anyone looking for a well-written, easy to follow and understand, concise UML 2.0 reference manual. If you're a career designer, note that this book does not describe in full detail, the complete syntax of UML 2.0. That said, if you're drawing fancy pictures using syntax not described in Fast Track UML 2.0, then perhaps that's a sign that you're models are too detailed. If you're brand new to the study of OOAD looking to develop these skills, this book alone probably isn't what you're after, though it would still serve well as a supplement to another material geared towards teaching OOAD. As a bonus, the book is priced well.

Rating:
Summary: Too Many Errors to be Useful
Review: I bought this book for its value as a "quick read" of UML 2.0, and as prep for the OMG UML Certification.
I'm just on Chapter 1, and have found so many glaring errors so far that I suspect everything in the book has to be carefully read and re-read to identify the errors.
Examples: page 12 - the definitions for "precondition: and "postcondition" are EXACTLY the same. Page 17 - the graphic does not support the text that the notation for aggregation and composition are different. I suspect that the book was rushed to publication without adequate proofreading, which is too bad because, other than the errors, it's very consice and read-able.

Rating:
Summary: An example of badly written book
Review: In response to the comment "Too Many Errors to be Useful" dated August 19, 2004, I would like to further commenting how bad it was written. Not only it is too consise, sometimes you read it with lots of ambiguities come into your mind.

Same as M. J. Graham, I stopped proceeding beyond half of the Chapter 1. Figure 1.13 shows two examples of provided interfaces, using both notations. The usage differences between the two notations are never addressed.





Rating:
Summary: A response from the author
Review: M. J. Graham correctly points out that the definition of postcondition is incorrect. This has been addressed. She also correctly notes that something is wrong with Figure 1-17; there was a problem in showing the box around PostingRule as a dashed outline, and I'm not sure why this was not corrected. However, I fail to see how these add up to 'so many glaring errors,' and I suggest that Ms. Graham forward notice of other errors she finds to APress for future correction.

Mr. Ng, on the other hand, makes an assertion that is clearly false. The differences between the notations in Figure 1-13 are explained on the previous page; if he wishes to see an expression of which notation is 'better,' he'll have to find a different book. In the meantime, remarks such as 'sometimes you read it with lots of ambiguities come into your mind' is less than useful. With regard to the comment about how 'bad' it was written, I'll just say that at least I know proper grammar.