ridiculous marketecture notation
The following is an open letter to the OMG.Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 01:59:42 -0500
From: Ben Eng
To: info@omg.org
Subject: non-technical visual notation for UML (Ridiculous Marketecture Notation)
Message-ID: <20060317065942.ga4298@jetpen.com>
Will the OMG be defining a standard for a visual notation appropriate
for non-technical presentations (Ridiculous Marketecture Notation),
which can be used to present models of software architectures
according to a UML profile?
Examples:
http://www.mysql.com/common/images/PSEA_diagram.jpg
http://labs.jboss.com/portal/jbossas/images/appInstrumentation.gif
http://www.omg.org/gettingstarted/Images/oma.gif
http://www.omg.org/images/logos/diagram-client_to_request_to_object_implementation.gif
http://technology.wildlifecenter.org/images/WCV_net.jpg
Note that ad hoc notations for presenting software architecture
diagrams for marketing purposes continue to abound and proliferate,
because they are more intuitive to non-technical audiences (and in
many cases even to UML-savvy software professionals). There ought to
be a way for UML diagrams to be presented in a more visually appealing
way so that ad hoc notations can be avoided.
Software requires UML diagrams that are intuitively consumable by
non-technical audiences for the same reasons that architectural
blueprints for building construction are intuitively consumable by
home developers and home owners, who contract them. UML diagrams that
are only consumable by those who produce the diagrams and implement
the software are only addressing half the stakeholders. The other half
include those people, who are the source of the requirements and the
users of the software.
posted by Ben Eng @ 01:07
0 comments
