>I know I said I will not react to this - but decided it would be more fun of I would :)

Ok, u funny-waster-of-time guy :)

>I know the diags. in the lecture look more like ER diagrams than any OO notation - and there is a simple reason for that, I used a traditional
>case tool to draw them - that doesn't change the idea the diags represent

It's not a matter of notation. As i see it there are two main different
approaches: OO purist will say that u have to do a sound OOAD and
from that derive the structure of your database and interaction
between data and objects. The other is starting with a data model,
and from it start building your class structure. My point is that
you are closer to the later (so i am, Ok maybe i'm closer than you:)), for
example look at the "Asembly-devices relation" *Object?!?* in your
diagram in fig 3. We both agree that finally it's an hybrid approach
so maybe discussing how closer u are to one or the other AD
strategy is pretty subjetive anyway (let's say u're at the middle :))

BTH, there is a good shareware tool for OOAD named Object Domain,
if you (and others) are interested it can be found at
http://www.he.net/~dirk/domain.html it supports Booch & OMT.

Ciao,

J. Luis