Friday, March 07, 2008
Architecture Fundamentals, Pt. 1
For a long time, I have been thinking about collecting architecture fundamentals: technology-neutral building blocks for software architecture. I have finally put a presentation together (I had to: I will be giving talk on this at JAX 2008).I am not yet really quite sure I really got it right, so I put together a multi-part screencast on this topic that I will put out here on my blog over the next weeks to collect feedback (yes, from you!) about whether this stuff makes sense.
So here is the introduction: Architecture Fundamentals, Pt. 1. I am eager to learn what you think about it. permalink
Comments:
<< Home
It's a honor to be the first to leave a comment ;-)
Briefly:
1. I like very much the idea and the style;
2. it seems I'll have to wait for 2nd part to see/listen to "real" contents;
3. minor annoyances in the audio track (sometimes it's like some words are repeated from an accelerated replica of your voice).
Thank you for the initiative.
I re-discovered recently your works about MDSD, the MSDS book, openArchitectureWare and all the stuff around, and I'm very hungry of information about.
Briefly:
1. I like very much the idea and the style;
2. it seems I'll have to wait for 2nd part to see/listen to "real" contents;
3. minor annoyances in the audio track (sometimes it's like some words are repeated from an accelerated replica of your voice).
Thank you for the initiative.
I re-discovered recently your works about MDSD, the MSDS book, openArchitectureWare and all the stuff around, and I'm very hungry of information about.
Hey Markus
this looks quite interesting. The idea is great, the implementation looks promising ... lets see.
Right now I have one small critisicm:
The introduction slides about concept and combinators are for me acadamical. I know what these words mean and don't need a formal definition.
Anyway looking forward to the next part!
this looks quite interesting. The idea is great, the implementation looks promising ... lets see.
Right now I have one small critisicm:
The introduction slides about concept and combinators are for me acadamical. I know what these words mean and don't need a formal definition.
Anyway looking forward to the next part!
the slides are nice, but the sound seems to be kinda f****d up. looking forward for the next parts.
I'm wondering when concepts are atomic how do you call combined concepts? is B with B!A really atomic if A is a concept by itself?
I'm wondering when concepts are atomic how do you call combined concepts? is B with B!A really atomic if A is a concept by itself?
Hi all,
thanks for your feedback! I will post the second part in a couple of days.
@Umerto:
1) thanks.
2) yes, agree.
3) the sound really isn't that great. I have recorded it with a decent microphone, but the Flash encoder in Camtasia seems to produce some strange artefacts. I don't know how to avoid that :-(
@Steilpass:
yes... the intro slides... I agree that maybe they are too academic, but I wanted to make clear what I mean by concept. And the combinators will be used quite a bit in the following parts... let's see what you think after the second part.
@Richard:
see above for the sound :-(
About the "atomicness": good point... I'll have to think about that.
@Stefan:
yes, it is there (for those who don't know what we're talking about: Presentation.zen). While I like some of the design suggestions (as you can tell from the slides :-)) the first 100 pages of the book are way too philosophical for my taste.
Thanks,
Markus
thanks for your feedback! I will post the second part in a couple of days.
@Umerto:
1) thanks.
2) yes, agree.
3) the sound really isn't that great. I have recorded it with a decent microphone, but the Flash encoder in Camtasia seems to produce some strange artefacts. I don't know how to avoid that :-(
@Steilpass:
yes... the intro slides... I agree that maybe they are too academic, but I wanted to make clear what I mean by concept. And the combinators will be used quite a bit in the following parts... let's see what you think after the second part.
@Richard:
see above for the sound :-(
About the "atomicness": good point... I'll have to think about that.
@Stefan:
yes, it is there (for those who don't know what we're talking about: Presentation.zen). While I like some of the design suggestions (as you can tell from the slides :-)) the first 100 pages of the book are way too philosophical for my taste.
Thanks,
Markus
Hi Markus,
I am interested in Software Architecture and often try thinking about the subject in abstract way. I liked your slides. I agree with others about Sound :).
I am in process of finding out whether some rules and constraints can be created and fed to the Drools engine to produce some automatic patterns through the engine as a tentative architecture which can be taken as basis of the solution and worked on.
The idea is sort of as Accountants can use accounting software to store their data and knowledge to find out information and trends about their business, can we have some system when applied which will come out with some suggestions by going through all the constraints and generic requirements.
As an example we can take requirement of data storage, where the system will ask do you have data storage requirement then there will be suggestions about technology, time of development, options to choose. As soon as one more requirement is added to the system it will combine the suggestions to eliminate some options which cannot be generically applied to both the requirements and hence giving a better set of options. This is just an idea about the project I am into recently. I am exploring the usage of some rules engine for this and also trying to think about other ways.
Your presentations or I will say upcoming presentations are important for me in this context. I appreciate you investing yout time in this effort.
with regards
Tushar
Tushar Joshi, Nagpur
http://www.tusharvjoshi.com
Post a Comment
I am interested in Software Architecture and often try thinking about the subject in abstract way. I liked your slides. I agree with others about Sound :).
I am in process of finding out whether some rules and constraints can be created and fed to the Drools engine to produce some automatic patterns through the engine as a tentative architecture which can be taken as basis of the solution and worked on.
The idea is sort of as Accountants can use accounting software to store their data and knowledge to find out information and trends about their business, can we have some system when applied which will come out with some suggestions by going through all the constraints and generic requirements.
As an example we can take requirement of data storage, where the system will ask do you have data storage requirement then there will be suggestions about technology, time of development, options to choose. As soon as one more requirement is added to the system it will combine the suggestions to eliminate some options which cannot be generically applied to both the requirements and hence giving a better set of options. This is just an idea about the project I am into recently. I am exploring the usage of some rules engine for this and also trying to think about other ways.
Your presentations or I will say upcoming presentations are important for me in this context. I appreciate you investing yout time in this effort.
with regards
Tushar
Tushar Joshi, Nagpur
http://www.tusharvjoshi.com
<< Home