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
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.
View Comments
There are currently no comments to display.
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must be a registered user of FCW.com and be logged in. Use one of the forms below to login or register for FREE to FCW.com. To protect your privacy, you can use an alias as your username.
