<sigh> I'll repeat myself.
In ArchiMate the most practical method of modelling can be to model an archetype and then elements that realise the archetype.
Thank you for making the effort, and clarifying what specifically you found strange (I'll forgive the dramatics).
My interpretation of your comment is: even though there are not classes and instances in Archimate, the pattern of using an archetype with elements that realise that archetype can still be used. Hopefully that is the right interpretation, or close to right.
If I have understood your point then I certainly agree that it is a valid modelling pattern and can be used. Whether I have understood your point or not, I'd still assert that pattern isn't appropriate for all scenarios, and not for the specific ones that I have provided (in this thread and others); and that there are genuine use cases for modelling when the most practical approach is to have the same element visualised on a diagram multiple times.
For a concrete example:
- I have an element, type Archimate Application Component, let's call it "SAP ERP" (in this sense "SAP ERP" is an instance of Application Component, but as stated earlier this is not useful in this context as the archimate meta-types aren't part of the model)
- This element realises (directly or indirectly) a number of Archimate Application Services, Business Processes, Business Services and Capabilities (again this is a different sense, these are not archetypes being realised)
- It so happens that "SAP ERP" realises multiple Capabilities and I wish to illustrate this in a diagram
- I could show "SAP ERP" and all the relevant Capabilities on a diagram with the connectors between them, however there are in fact multiple other Application Components i wish to show on the same view, so lots of arrows all over the place and no insights from the diagram
- Instead I choose to use block style (box in box) diagram of the Capabilities (Capability Map) and overlay all the Application Components on each of the relevant Capabilities they realise
- But I can't because I can only have one "SAP ERP" on the diagram.
Yes, I could create multiple Application Components, one for each of the Capabilities. I could call each of them "SAP ERP" (or some variant), I could even establish a formal relationship between these and the 'real' "SAP ERP". Then I could place these all on the same diagram. But these elements genuinely represent the same thing, their sole purpose is to make the diagram work - there is no value having them in the model.
There is a workaround to this provided you are prepared to work bottom up and accept slightly more onerous maintenance and apply some extra structure to the project browser.
The approach is to create an individual capability-app component diagram for each capability and overlay the application components in the way you want on each of these diagrams. Obviously this will work as you won't be trying to put an element on the same diagram twice.
Then to present the consolidated diagram that you really want, create another diagram and insert/drag-drop the specific diagrams you've created as diagram frames. Move them around to get the information where you want it. This works quite well in my opinion, especially if you use the appearance options to remove the diagram frame borders. The consolidated diagram then looks pretty much as if you've created it directly. The consolidated diagram is also dynamic and so updates automatically should any of the lower level individual diagrams be changed.
Show Posts
