<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wikidot="http://www.wikidot.com/rss-namespace">

	<channel>
		<title>Enterprise Architecture - new forum threads</title>
		<link>http://iea.wikidot.com/forum/start</link>
		<description>Threads in forums of the site &quot;Enterprise Architecture&quot; - From Strategy to Execution</description>
				<copyright></copyright>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2026 11:23:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
					<item>
				<guid>http://iea.wikidot.com/forum/t-230292</guid>
				<title>EA tools that I&#039;ve tried recently</title>
				<link>http://iea.wikidot.com/forum/t-230292/ea-tools-that-i-ve-tried-recently</link>
				<description>EA tools I&#039;ve tried out</description>
				<pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2010 20:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Adrian Campbell</wikidot:authorName>								<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>Recently I've tried the following EA tools:</p> <p>BiZZdesign Architect<br /> Avolution Abacus<br /> Salamander MOOD<br /> Mega<br /> MetaStorm ProVision</p> <p>The first two are definitely modern tools that fully support IEEE 1471 concepts and separation of concerns. Both are excellent.</p> <p>The last two suffer from an odd design quirk that means that a view (i.e. a diagram) must belong to an object.<br /> The result of this quirk is that to create context free diagrams they must belong to a dummy object.<br /> Why are these tools built this way ?</p> <p>Another common feature is a proprietary way of drawing business process flow (Event value chain) diagrams in a truly BPMN style.<br /> The data object that is input or output from a Business Process or an Activity is not the same data object that is modelled elsewhere in the tool.<br /> Mega is particularly bad at this.</p> <p>Neither Mega or ProVision seem to know how Services (Business Services, Application Services etc.) should be modelled either.<br /> Both these can be customised to improve them but I for one would expect support for modelling SOA to be there by default.</p> <p>In comparison both Avolution Abacus and BiZZdesign Architect are sweet and painless to use.<br /> Why are they not in Gartners magic Quadrant then?</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://iea.wikidot.com/forum/t-52794</guid>
				<title>EA Governance Processes</title>
				<link>http://iea.wikidot.com/forum/t-52794/ea-governance-processes</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:17:52 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Anonymous</wikidot:authorName>								<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>Hi All,<br /> It would be nice if someone could throw some light on the effective EA governance processes. Are there any industry standards for the same ?<br /> Are there any existing processes ?</p> <p>Answers are most welcome&#8230; :)</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
				</channel>
</rss>