Archimate Symbols

There are many ways to do design and there are a huge lot of tools that can be used for UML modeling. Most of my experience is that UML design and code generation works pretty well if set up properly, but I still think that the transform from abstract architecture into UML design models is still hard to manage. Perhaps because abstract architecture does not really result in code, but in systems and rules and process descriptions.This leads back to the tooling issue. I have been using Enterprise Architect from Sparx Systems for a while and like it but what to do if the customer does not have an established tooling for Architecture.

This might sound like one of those vi versus vim questions, or Linux versus Windows, but it is not. The tooling is important. Not in the sens that it must be a certain software from a certain vendor but working with enterprise architecture mostly results in a evolutionary step that is expected to live for a long time and that is expected to take even further evolutionary steps.

In this sens the tooling is important  as my work will be base for further development by someone else for the upcoming say 10 years. I cannot do the tooling on my this-is-the-software-I-like but must ensure that the tools is selected with long term aspects as well.

It is at this point I start evaluating the word processor as UML tool using clipart one way or another. This is what we got when I started 1992; we did all design in Fram Maker on Sun OS 4 and OpenLook. Those where the days ;)

Archimate Symbols

And I still can fell pretty comfortable working in the word processor as long there is a decent set of symbols. Currently I have had hard to find a decent set of Archimate Symbols so I decided to build my own. This did not only result in the symbols but I did them in Google Docs Drawing as well and can now do Archimate Design in the cloud. For my this makes the same value of Google Draw as MS Visio Professional used to do but for anyone with a google mail account it is gratis. I am very pleased.So pleased I decided to allow You to use the Archimate Symbols licenced under Creative Commons - CC0 1.0.


// Erik

The Djunge of Licencing

I ran across this article by the H today. It covers some of the issues around Open Source Licences and the problems in combining them.

There are lot of stuff that are not clearly covered by any license. Take for example the Qt library, one of my favourites. It has a lot of smart functions. The development is open and freely accessible for each and every one.

So, what if I surf around the bug tracker or more precisely the feature requests and when I find a nice one for my own stuff I steal it.

Take for example the idea of "advanced rubber band", the suggestion that the square used to change size of an object is rotated together with the object.

The question is then: who owns the idea and the feature request, and under what license is it made available to the public?

The same goes the other way around, what it the idea is stolen and then presented as a suggestion and implemented. Who is then responsible for stealing the idea?

I have had the favour of working with mixed closed and open source on an earlier assignment. The conclusion is that this is an area where one shall take  particular care. One is actually playing with the risk of having the entire application suite forcedly licensed as open source with the requirement to supply full source code to any one that asks. We had each and every usage of open source licensed software reviewed by lawyers and signed by someone high in the hierarchy. Thinking of it I this was an reasonable procedure.

Just a disclaimer; I do favour open source software in general and Linux in particular. Meanwhile I do software engineering for living which implies the usage of paid software which in most cases means closed source software.