Letter: For enterprise architecture, keep it simple
A reader writes, "The reason EA has not advanced is because it has been largely the realm of techies."
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.
Regarding "DOD's Wisnosky: EA needs notation" : I like Wisnosky's idea on a common symbology for enterprise architecture. But if techies and network experts develop this new language, it will likely be too complex and burdensome to effectively communicate to a broad audience. If it can't communicate to a broad audience, it will doom EA rather than advance it. EA serves to make transparent and communicate and make plain, not take concepts that are Greek to most and make them Chinese. The reason EA has not advanced is because it has been largely the realm of techies. To advance EA, we need to involve people who understand mission, process, and data more than anyone else. What holds EA back is the fact that it is viewed as the domain of hardware and software experts, when it is not.
Anonymous
letters@fcw.com
Anonymous
letters@fcw.com