2.6 TreatyAllyResponsibility Cards


2.6 Treaty“Ally“Responsibility Cards

When treaties are very simple (one fortress interacting with one other, no intermediaries, no third parties), FAR cards may be all that are necessary to provide an architecture overview. In many real-life scenarios, however, the overall treaties that define the enterprise architecture are more complex. In these cases you may find yourself chaining together a large sequence of FAR cards to get a good architectural overview. Those itty-bitty tables at Starbucks (where else would one do an architectural review?) may not have enough room for the entire treaty, if diagrammed exclusively with FAR cards.

When you need more than two or three FAR cards to keep track of all the treaty responsibilities, it is probably time to switch to treaty“ally“responsibility (TAR) cards . Like FAR cards, TAR cards are small and concise . But whereas FAR cards are fortress centric, TAR cards are treaty centric. TAR cards provide an overview of exactly which fortresses are part of which treaties and what the responsibilities of those fortresses are.

Figure 2.8 shows a prototype of a TAR card; Figure 2.9, an example.

Figure 2.8. Prototype of a TAR Card

Figure 2.9. A Sample TAR Card



Software Fortresses. Modeling Enterprise Architectures
Software Fortresses: Modeling Enterprise Architectures
ISBN: 0321166086
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2003
Pages: 114

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net