Reviews:MariCarmenSuarezFigueroa about Enlarge Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsomption
From Odp
(Difference between revisions)
(New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009/9/8 |SubmittedBy=MariCarmenSuarezFigueroa |ContentOPUnderReview=Enlarge Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsompt...) |
Current revision (15:05, 8 September 2009) (view source) (New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009/9/8 |SubmittedBy=MariCarmenSuarezFigueroa |ContentOPUnderReview=Enlarge Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsompt...) |
Current revision
MariCarmenSuarezFigueroa about Enlarge Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsomption (Revision ID: Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsomption?oldid=5624 5624)
Overall suggestion (score): -1 - reject
Review Summary: It is not clear enough the motivation of this pattern. Indeed, in my opinion the example provided is not a good one (it seems strange to have a class called "Fauna-Flora"; what for me should be two different classes).
Reviewer Confidence: Normal.
Problems: The main problem for me is due to the example provide in the pattern. It is not clear that such situation should be represented having a class missed different domain elements.
Community Relevance:
Relation to Best Practices:
Reusability:
Relations to Other Patterns:
Overall Understandability:
Clear Problem Description:
Clear Relevance and Consequences:
Clear Figures and Illustrations:
Missing Information:
Posted: 2009/9/8 Last modified: 2009/9/8