Abstract
This paper introduces a classification for decisions originating from work performed by architects. With the creation of a new architecture, all observed decisions were documented using an existing taxonomy extended with the introduced classification. In the first four months, 80 decisions were documented. Not all decisions have the same value for the architecture and one needed a classification to reason about importance of decisions. After realization of the first increment of the architecture a sanity check was performed: The architects showed how the six most important design artefacts and the fifteen most important architectural constraints and prerequisites were related. The relationship was via decisions and the classification helps to reduce the work to make and maintain this connection over time. The classification is dynamic and over time decisions can be classified differently. This enables architectural learning by pointing out which decisions were taken too early or had little impact.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Kruchten, P., Lago, P., van Vliet, H.: Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge. In: Hofmeister, C., Crnković, I., Reussner, R. (eds.) QoSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4214, pp. 43–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Tang, A., Han, J., Vasa, R.: Software architecture design reasoning: A case for improved methodology support. IEEE Software 26(2), 43–49 (2009)
Tang, A., Jin, Y., Han, J.: A rationale-based architecture model for design traceability and reasoning. Journal of Systems and Software 80(6), 918–934 (2007)
Jansen, A., Avgeriou, P., van der Ven, J.S.: Enriching software architecture documentation. Journal of Systems and Software 82(8), 1232–1248 (2009)
Kruchten, P.: An ontology of architectural design decisions in software intensive systems. In: 2nd Groningen Workshop on Software Variability, pp. 54–61 (2004)
AUTOSAR: AUTomotive open system ARchitecture, AUTOSAR (2009)
Automotive technology: The connected car. The Economist (June 2009)
Tyree, J., Akerman, A.: Architecture decisions: demystifying architecture. IEEE Software 22(2), 19–27 (2005)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Eklund, U., Arts, T. (2010). A Classification of Value for Software Architecture Decisions. In: Babar, M.A., Gorton, I. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6285. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15114-9_30
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15114-9_30
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15113-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15114-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)