Midori,

Thanks for walking through the example. What you are saying is exactly what I'm seeing. Unfortunately, it isn't quite exactly what I desire.

To elaborate on my situation, I am trying to document an existing application using some critical class diagrams. In other words, I am not at a point where changing the code is an option (not that I'd advocate changing the code to suit the class diagramming tool anyway). My hope was to create a new diagram and then drop on the existing classes that I think are most significant to some view of the system.

Granted it has been a while since I've dug into the exact semantics of UML, but I've always used an association to represent this type of relationship in the past. I would ideally love to be able to even call the association an aggregation or composition after I've put both classes on the diagram. I don't see a benefit to the representation you explained over one of those options, and in fact find it less intuitive. After all, I'm not really trying to communicate the fact that a java List was used, but instead that a parent has a collection of children.

I guess what I'm saying is that I request in some future version the JUDE development team consider making this type of representation an option.

Thanks.

Jason