UML-like Diagrams Description
The IEEE UML-like diagrams provide an easy to understand visualization of a model even for those that do not understand the formal UML modeling syntax.
A box is used to represent a class. A box can have multiple compartments. In most cases there will be a single-compartment box that represents a class or a two-compartment box that has a class name in the top box and the attributes for that class in the bottom box.
Figure 1 – example class/attribute boxes
In Figure 1, the white box with “class-name-not-defined-by-this-IEEE802-standard” is used to represent a class that is imported from another standard. The other example in Figure 1 shows a grey box that has a class (with keys listed if applicable) and a compartment for attributes. Figure 2 provides a small example.
Figure 2 – class/attribute example
The arrows/diamonds/lines provide for composition, aggregation, or association relationships.
Figure 3 – relationships
In Figure 3, the “Composition” example shows a “has a” relationship. Composition is indicated by a filled diamond shape which is connected to the “parent” of the relationship. The Part is the “child” of the relationship. When the class (parent) that contains the part (child) is deleted, the part is deleted as well. For example, if I delete a folder from my computer, all the files are deleted too. The “Aggregation” example is a “has a” relationship as well, but in this case the parts can exist independently of the class that was aggregating the parts. For example, if a school course is deleted, the students still exist.
The other two diagrams in Figure 3 show associations. Thing A is associated with Thing B, meaning there is (some kind of) structural relationship, but no further detail is given. Thing C is associated with Thing D and it is possible to navigate to Thing D through Thing C. The arrows can be on both ends of the association if bi-directional navigation is desired.
Relationship to YANG
The UML-like diagram provides a great deal of latitude to provide the most concise information in a graphical way. There is no requirement to match the data types in YANG in the UML-like diagram. There is no formal mapping between the structure of the YANG and the structure of the UML-like diagram.