Just a simple box in a diagram might raise multiple doubts and it is very important to avoid them by explicitly adding details about the box or shape meaning in the diagram legend. It might be associated with either a piece of data, a bunch of code, or a process. Using any kind of box or shape which is not properly documented might cause multiple interpretations. Let’s now iterate through a list of pitfalls which might hinder the process of properly creating architectural diagrams. It suffers most of the issues described below Do not let an architectural diagram require thousand of words or clarifications!Įxample of an improper architectural diagram. The same concept applies for an architectural diagram: if it raises more questions than answers, the diagram is not well created. As per this wiki explanation, "it refers to the notion that a complex idea can be conveyed with just a single still image or that an image of a subject conveys its meaning or essence more effectively than a description does". Current pitfalls when designing architectural diagramsīefore going deeper into possible issues, I would like to have an analogy to an English idiom which says "a picture is worth a thousand words". structure, elements, relationships, properties, principles) and across different stakeholders having various technical backgrounds and concerns. That’s why it is important that every architect or software engineer rely on several guidelines when creating architectural diagrams, since they are the common ground of communicating the application’s architecture over time (e.g. Nevertheless, diagrams must be self descriptive, consistent, accurate enough and connected to the code. In comparison to an architectural model which must be formal and standardized, the diagrams might not necessarily be formalized or follow a specific standard. I saw a lot of issues regarding inconsistency, fragmentation, and granularity of the rendered information and the look of the diagrams. In software architecture, such diagrams are created in compliance with views which are related to a specific viewpoint that could be part of a model, but in the current article I prefer to stick to the term architectural diagram and not be very formal all the other aspects are not intended to be covered here.īased on my experience as a software architect and technical trainer, there are a lot of discrepancies between projects and inside the project team from developer to developer in the way architectural diagrams are created. Kruchten 4+1, Rozanski & Woods, etc) or not, there is a need to document some parts of the application by creating diagrams. Whether we are following a formal architectural model (e.g. Additional concerns might emerge and could easilyĪt some point in time, in every software project we are involved in, there might be a need to create architectural diagrams.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |