I'm looking into adding some simple properties to our Archimate elements, things like quality scores. As far as I have found, I could do this using Tagged Values or extending a stereotype and adding properties to the extension.
For the repository in my sphere of influence, I can make either approach work. However, there exist multiple repos, some of which are planned to be more integrated using RAS. I'm having difficulties weighing the pro's and cons of this choice. I'll lay out what I've found so far. Hopefully someone points out a flaw in my knowledge or reasoning and there's an easy answer.
Extending stereotypes seems to be the preferred way forward when ignoring compatibility. Properties are displayed as properties, they're automatically added to a new element, and don't even require redefining toolboxes etc. However, the new elements have a specific stereotype. MDGs can help distribute those, but getting all repository managers to agree to use them is outside of my current scope. Interoperability to some extent will be required in the future, and having similar elements with different stereotypes between repositories seems to be an unmanageble situation. It also seems like it requires the custom MDG to be active, and I'm not sure how that works when there's multiple useful MDGs in a shared repository.
Tagged Values seem to be less part of EA's core since EA15. However, they're quick to add to a model and simple to understand. They can be added to existing elements, regardless of their stereotype. A big downside to using them is that each new element needs to have them added, but I don't mind doing some scripting to manage this. They're also less structured and less scalable to manage than using an extension. On the other hand, they're much less invasive to add to an existing model than new stereotypes.
What are your thoughts and experiences on this?
