The Layered viewpoint pictures several layers and aspects of an enterprise architecture in one diagram. There are two categories of layers, namely dedicated layers and service layers. Thus, we can easily separate the internal structure and organization of a dedicated layer from its externally observable behavior expressed as the service layer that the dedicated layer realizes.
The order, number, or nature of these layers are not fixed, but in general a more or less complete and natural layering of an ArchiMate model will contain the succession of layers depicted in the example given below. However, this example is by no means intended to be prescriptive. The main goal of the Layered viewpoint is to provide overview in one diagram. Furthermore, this viewpoint can be used as support for impact of change analysis and performance analysis or for extending the service portfolio.
A landscape map is a matrix that represents a three-dimensional coordinate system that represents architectural relations. The dimensions of the landscape maps can be freely chosen from the architecture that is being modeled.
In practice, often dimensions are chosen from different architectural domains; for instance, business functions, application components, and products. Note that a landscape map uses the ArchiMate concepts , but not the standard notation of these concepts.
The value of cells can be visualized by means of colored rectangles with text labels. Obviously, landscape maps are a more powerful and expressive representation of relations than traditional cross tables.
They provide a practical manner for the generation and publication of overview tables for managers, process, and system owners. Furthermore, architects may use landscape maps as a resource allocation instrument and as an analysis tool for the detection of patterns and changes in this allocation.
Readability, management and reduction of complexity, comparison of alternatives. Downloads of the ArchiMate documentation, are available under license from the ArchiMate information web site. The license is free to any organization wishing to use ArchiMate entirely for internal purposes for example, to develop an information system architecture for use within that organization.
Typical Stakeholders. Introductory Viewpoint. Enterprise architects, managers. Make design choices visible, convince stakeholders. Designing, deciding, informing. Abstraction Level. Coherence, Overview, Detail. Business, Application, and Technology layers see also Figure 5.
Structure, behavior, information see also Figure 5. Organization Viewpoint. Business layer see also Figure 5. Structure see also Figure 5. Actor Co-operation Viewpoint. Enterprise, process, and domain architects. Relations of actors with their environment. Structure, behavior see also Figure 5. Business Function Viewpoint. Behavior, structure see also Figure 5. Business Process Viewpoint. Process and domain architects, operational managers. Behavior see also Figure 5. Business Process Co-operation Viewpoint.
Designing, deciding. Business layer, application layer see also Figure 5. Product Viewpoint. Product developers, product managers, process and domain architects. Product development, value offered by the products of the enterprise.
Behavior, information see also Figure 5. Application Behavior Viewpoint. Enterprise, process, application, and domain architects. Coherence, details. Application layer see also Figure 5. Information, behavior, structure see also Figure 5. Application Co-operation Viewpoint. Enterprise , process, application, and domain architects. Application Structure Viewpoint. Application structure, consistency and completeness, reduction of complexity.
Structure, information see also Figure 5. Application Usage Viewpoint. Enterprise, process, and application architects, operational managers. Consistency and completeness, reduction of complexity. Business and application layers see also Figure 5. Infrastructure Viewpoint. Infrastructure architects, operational managers. Stability, security, dependencies, costs of the infrastructure. Technology layer see also Figure 5.
Infrastructure Usage Viewpoint. Application, infrastructure architects, operational managers. Dependencies, performance, scalability. Application and technology layers see also Figure 5. Implementation and Deployment Viewpoint. Application and infrastructure architects, operational managers.
Dependencies, security, risks. Application layer, technology layer see also Figure 5. Information Structure Viewpoint. Domain and information architects. Business layer, application layer, technology layer see also Figure 5. A recent technology survey conducted by Software Connect found the following pieces of information:.
This means companies may be hesitant to look into newer web-based construction or cloud-based software. Start your search for construction management software with the experts at Software Connect. Talk with a Software Expert…. Construction Management Software Get the best construction management software for your business.
Get a free consultation from an independent system expert. Get Recommendations. Simple interface. Strong job costing. Large network of resellers and knowledge experts. Demo Learn More. Best for. Modular-based purchase what you need. Can easily upgrade when you grow.
Strong CRM tool. Highly visual interface. Strong mobile application. Encourages collaboration through real-time web access. Customizable dashboard. One-click access to tasks relevant to specific users. Real-time communication for all employees. Optional financial management add-on. Unlimited users, documents, photos, and data. Free version available. Easy to use and modern interface. Unlimited takeoffs in paid version.
What We Like. Setup can be lengthy. Customizing reports is difficult. No time-tracking for employee time sheets. Client OS: Windows. Best for Small Businesses. Dated interface. Learning curve. Client OS: Web, Windows. Slow uploads. No easy way to share calendar view of tasks. No pre setup forms. Not many reports or tax tables compared to other systems. Infrequent updates.
Limited report customization options. Best for Project Management. Scheduling tool can be cumbersome. Mobile app offers limited feature access. Client OS: Web. Best for Estimating. Excel charges monthly integration fee. Can not organize plan sheet tabs. All Products No products found. Viewpoint Construction Software provides construction professionals with integrated, configurable software applications for all aspects of construction management. Price Range. Fieldwire is a construction field management software solution for small to large construction teams.
With Fieldwire, your team will be able to coordinate efficiently and collaborate in real-time. Fieldwire is available as an app for iPhone, iPad, and…. Procore is your complete online construction management software. Procore provides cloud-based project management applications to help construction professionals build quality projects on time and within budget. Procore is designed to combine standard…. The Jonas Enterprise solution is a fully integrated, highly flexible, industry specific software package designed for mid-sized construction and service management companies.
Jonas Construction Software specializes in providing complete construction…. Buildertrend is cutting-edge, cloud-based project management software. With more than 1 million users across the globe, they empower the construction industry with a better way to build. The software helps construction professionals build more projects…. It is the only software companies will need to run their entire construction operation.
This includes complete Project Management, Business Management and Collaboration between employees, clients and…. Techniques such as inheritance - which enables parts of an existing interface to an object to be changed - enhance the potential for re-usability by allowing predefined classes to be tailored or extended when the services they offer do not quite meet the requirement of the developer.
If modularity and software re-use are likely to be key objectives of new software developments, consideration must be given to whether the component parts of any proposed architecture may facilitate or prohibit the desired level of modularity in the appropriate areas. Software portability - the ability to take a piece of software written in one environment and make it run in another - is important in many projects, especially product developments.
It requires that all software and hardware aspects of a chosen Technology Architecture not just the newly developed application be available on the new platform. It will, therefore, be necessary to ensure that the component parts of any chosen architecture are available across all the appropriate target platforms.
Interoperability is always required between the component parts of a new architecture. It may also, however, be required between a new architecture and parts of an existing legacy system; for example, during the staggered replacement of an old system. Interoperability between the new and old architectures may, therefore, be a factor in architectural choice. This view considers two general categories of software systems.
First, there are those systems that require only a user interface to a database, requiring little or no business logic built into the software. These systems can be called data-intensive. Second, there are those systems that require users to manipulate information that might be distributed across multiple databases, and to do this manipulation according to a predefined business logic. These systems can be called information-intensive.
Data-intensive systems can be built with reasonable ease through the use of 4GL tools. In these systems, the business logic is in the mind of the user; i. Information-intensive systems are different. Information is defined as "meaningful data"; i.
Information is different from data. Data is the tokens that are stored in databases or other data stores. Information is multiple tokens of data combined to convey a message. For example, "3" is data, but "3 widgets" is information. Typically, information reflects a model.
Information-intensive systems also tend to require information from other systems and, if this path of information passing is automated, usually some mediation is required to convert the format of incoming information into a format that can be locally used. Because of this, information-intensive systems tend to be more complex than others, and require the most effort to build, integrate, and maintain.
This view is concerned primarily with information-intensive systems. In addition to building systems that can manage information, though, systems should also be as flexible as possible. This has a number of benefits. It allows the system to be used in different environments; for example, the same system should be usable with different sources of data, even if the new data store is a different configuration.
Similarly, it might make sense to use the same functionality but with users who need a different user interface. So information systems should be built so that they can be reconfigured with different data stores or different user interfaces.
If a system is built to allow this, it enables the enterprise to re-use parts or components of one system in another. The word "interoperate" implies that one processing system performs an operation on behalf of or at the behest of another processing system.
In practice, the request is a complete sentence containing a verb operation and one or more nouns identities of resources, where the resources can be information, data, physical devices, etc.
Interoperability comes from shared functionality. Interoperability can only be achieved when information is passed, not when data is passed.
Most information systems today get information both from their own data stores and other information systems. In some cases the web of connectivity between information systems is quite extensive. This means that the required data is available Anytime, Anywhere, by Anyone, who is Authorized, in Any way. This requires that many information systems are architecturally linked and provide information to each other. There must be some kind of physical connectivity between the systems.
This enables the transfer of bits. When the bits are assembled at the receiving system, they must be placed in the context that the receiving system needs. In other words, both the source and destination systems must agree on an information model.
The source system uses this model to convert its information into data to be passed, and the destination system uses this same model to convert the received data into information it can use. This usually requires an agreement between the architects and designers of the two systems. The ICD defines the exact syntax and semantics that the sending system will use so that the receiving system will know what to do when the data arrives. The biggest problem with ICDs is that they tend to be unique solutions between two systems.
If a given system must share information with n other systems, there is the potential need for n 2 ICDs. This extremely tight integration prohibits flexibility and the ability of a system to adapt to a changing environment. Maintaining all these ICDs is also a challenge. Use of new technologies such as XML, once they become reliable and well documented, might eliminate the need for an ICD. It should also ease the pain of maintaining all the interfaces.
Another approach is to build "mediators" between the systems. Mediators would use metadata that is sent with the data to understand the syntax and semantics of the data and convert it into a format usable by the receiving system.
However, mediators do require that well-formed metadata be sent, adding to the complexity of the interface. Typically, software architectures are either two-tier or three-tier. In a two-tier architecture, the user interface and business logic are tightly coupled while the data is kept independent. This gives the advantage of allowing the data to reside on a dedicated data server. It also allows the data to be independently maintained.
The tight coupling of the user interface and business logic assure that they will work well together, for this problem in this domain.
However, the tight coupling of the user interface and business logic dramatically increases maintainability risks while reducing flexibility and opportunities for re-use. A three-tier approach adds a tier that separates the business logic from the user interface. This in principle allows the business logic to be used with different user interfaces as well as with different data stores. To achieve maximum flexibility, software should utilize a five-tier scheme for software which extends the three-tier paradigm see The Five-Tier Organization.
The scheme is intended to provide strong separation of the three major functional areas of the architecture. Since there are client and server aspects of both the user interface and the data store, the scheme then has five tiers.
The presentation tier is typically COTS-based. The presentation interface might be an X Server, Win32, etc. There should be a separate tier for the user interface client. This client establishes the look-and-feel of the interface; the server presentation tier actually performs the tasks by manipulating the display. The user interface client hides the presentation server from the application business logic. The application business logic e.
This tier is called the "application logic" and functions as a server for the user interface client. It interfaces to the user interface typically through callbacks.
The application logic tier also functions as a client to the data access tier. If there is a user need to use an application with multiple databases with different schema, then a separate tier is needed for data access.
This client would access the data stores using the appropriate COTS interface 6 and then convert the raw data into an abstract data type representing parts of the information model. The interface into this object network would then provide a generalized Data Access Interface DAI which would hide the storage details of the data from any application that uses that data. Each tier in this scheme can have zero or more components. The organization of the components within a tier is flexible and can reflect a number of different architectures based on need.
For example, there might be many different components in the application logic tier scheduling, accounting, inventory control, etc. This clean separation of user interface, business logic, and information will result in maximum flexibility and componentized software that lends itself to product line development practices. For example, it is conceivable that the same functionality should be built once and yet be usable by different presentation servers e.
Moreover, this flexibility should not require massive rewrites to the software whenever a change is needed. The data access tier provides a standardized view of certain classes of data, and as such functions as a server to one or more application logic tiers. If implemented correctly, there would be no need for application code to "know" about the implementation details of the data. The application code would only have to know about an interface that presents a level of abstraction higher than the data.
For example, should a scheduling engine need to know what events are scheduled between two dates, that query should not require knowledge of tables and joins in a relational database. Moreover, the DAI could provide standardized access techniques for the data. This is not the only means to build a DAI, but is presented as a possibility. Whereas the Direct Data Access layer contains the implementation details of one or more specific data stores, the Object Network and the Information Distribution layer require no such knowledge.
Instead, the upper two layers reflect the need to standardize the interface for a particular domain. The Direct Data Access layer spans the gap between the Data Access tier and the Data Store tier, and therefore has knowledge of the implementation details of the data. The Object Network layer is the instantiation in software of the information model. As such, it is an efficient means to show the relationships that hold between pieces of data.
The translation of data accesses to objects in the network would be the role of the Direct Data Access layer. Within the Information Distribution layer lies the interface to the "outside world". This interface typically uses a data bus to distribute the data see below.
Objects in the object network would point to the applications or applets, allowing easy access to required processing code. The DAI enables a very flexible architecture. Multiple raw capabilities can access the same or different data stores all through the same DAI. Each DAI might be implemented in many ways, according to the specific needs of the raw capabilities using it. It is not always clear that a DAI is needed, and it appears to require additional work during all phases of development.
However, should a database ever be redesigned, or if an application is to be re-used and there is no control over how the new data is implemented, using a DAI saves time in the long run. Masks differences in data representation and invocation mechanisms to enable interworking between objects.
This transparency solves many of the problems of interworking between heterogeneous systems, and will generally be provided by default.
Masks from an object the failure and possible recovery of other objects or itself to enable fault tolerance. When this transparency is provided, the designer can work in an idealized world in which the corresponding class of failures does not occur. Masks the use of information about location in space when identifying and binding to interfaces. This transparency provides a logical view of naming, independent of actual physical location.
Masks from an object the ability of a system to change the location of that object. Migration is often used to achieve load balancing and reduce latency. Masks relocation of an interface from other interfaces bound to it. Relocation allows system operation to continue even when migration or replacement of some objects creates temporary inconsistencies in the view seen by their users. Masks the use of a group of mutually behaviorally compatible objects to support an interface.
Replication is often used to enhance performance and availability. Masks coordination of activities amongst a configuration of objects to achieve consistency. This commercial software is like a backplane onto which capabilities can be plugged. A system should adhere to a commercial implementation of a middleware standard. This is to ensure that capabilities using different commercial implementations of the standard can interoperate.
If more than one commercial standard is used e. Taken this way, every interface in the five-tier scheme represents an opportunity for distribution. Clients can interact with servers via the Infrastructure Bus. The software engineering view gives guidance on how to structure software in a very flexible manner. By following these guidelines, the resulting software will be componentized.
This enables the re-use of components in different environments. Moreover, through the use of an infrastructure bus and clean interfaces, the resulting software will be location-independent, enabling its distribution across a network.
The system engineering view is concerned with assembling software and hardware components into a working system. Systems engineers are typically concerned with location, modifiability, re-usability, and availability of all components of the system. The system engineering view presents a number of different ways in which software and hardware components can be assembled into a working system. To a great extent the choice of model determines the properties of the final system.
It looks at technology which already exists in the organization, and what is available currently or in the near future. This reveals areas where new technology can contribute to the function or efficiency of the new architecture, and how different types of processing platform can support different parts of the overall system.
Major concerns for this view are understanding the system requirements. In general these stakeholders are concerned with assuring that the appropriate components are developed and deployed within the system in an optimal manner. This view of the architecture focuses on computing models that are appropriate for a distributed computing environment. To support the migration of legacy systems, this section also presents models that are appropriate for a centralized environment.
The definitions of many of the computing models e. Therefore, some of the distinctions of features are not always clean. In general, however, the models are distinguished by the allocation of functions for an information system application to various components e. These functions that make up an information system application are presentation, application function, and data management.
In the model, clients are processes that request services, and servers are processes that provide services. Clients and servers can be located on the same processor, different multi-processor nodes, or on separate processors at remote locations.
The client typically initiates communications with the server. The server typically does not initiate a request with a client. A server may support many clients and may act as a client to another server. In these representations, the request-reply relationships would be defined in the API. Clients tend to be generalized and can run on one of many nodes.
Servers tend to be specialized and run on a few nodes. Clients are typically implemented as a call to a routine. Servers are typically implemented as a continuous process waiting for service requests from clients. The communication between a client and a server may involve a local communication between two independent processes on the same machine. In general, each of these can be assigned to either a client or server application, making appropriate use of platform services.
In this model, slave computers are attached to a master computer. Distribution is provided in one direction - from the master to the slaves. The slave computers perform application processing only when directed to by the master computer. In addition, slave processors can perform limited local processing, such as editing, function key processing, and field validation.
In this approach, the top layer is usually a powerful mainframe, which acts as a server to the second tier. The second layer consists of LAN servers and clients to the first layer as well as servers to the third layer. The third layer consists of PCs and workstations. In the peer-to-peer model there are co-ordinating processes. All of the computers are servers in that they can receive requests for services and respond to them; and all of the computers are clients in that they can send requests for services to other computers.
In current implementations, there are often redundant functions on the participating platforms. Attempts have been made to implement the model for distributed heterogeneous or federated database systems. Peer-to-Peer and Distributed Object Management Models A shows an example peer-to-peer configuration in which all platforms have complete functions.
The services provided by systems on a network are treated as objects. A requester need not know the details of how the object is configured. The approach requires:. Peer-to-Peer and Distributed Object Management Models presents two distributed object model examples. Example C shows how a peer-to-peer model would be altered to accomplish distributed object management.
The ORB specifies how objects can transparently make requests and receive responses. The communications engineering view is concerned with structuring communications and networking elements to simplify network planning and design. This view should be developed for the communications engineering personnel of the system, and should focus on how the system is implemented from the perspective of the communications engineer. Communications engineers are typically concerned with location, modifiability, re-usability, and availability of communications and networking services.
Major concerns for this view are understanding the network and communications requirements. In general these stakeholders are concerned with assuring that the appropriate communications and networking services are developed and deployed within the system in an optimal manner. Developing this view assists in the selection of the best model of communications for the system.
Communications networks are constructed of end devices e. The communications network provides the means by which information is exchanged. Forms of information include data, imagery, voice, and video.
Because automated information systems accept and process information using digital data formats rather than analogue formats, the TOGAF communications concepts and guidance will focus on digital networks and digital services. Integrated multimedia services are included. The communications engineering view describes the communications architecture with respect to geography, discusses the Open Systems Interconnection OSI reference model, and describes a general framework intended to permit effective system analysis and planning.
The names of the transport components are based on their respective geographic extent, but there is also a hierarchical relationship among them. The transport components correspond to a network management structure in which management and control of network resources are distributed across the different levels. The local components relate to assets that are located relatively close together geographically. This component contains fixed communications equipment and small units of mobile communications equipment.
LANs, to which the majority of end devices will be connected, are included in this component.
0コメント