Author Topic: Adopting Content Metamodel of TOGAF 9  (Read 524 times)

Ismar Slomic

  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Adopting Content Metamodel of TOGAF 9
« on: September 16, 2011, 06:53:20 pm »
We have started using Sparx EA 8.0 and TOGAF 9 for describing the enterprise architecture in our organization.

In the first phase, we want to adopt TOGAF to fit our organization and start describing the objects in our own metamodel (which will be influenced by TOGAF Content Metamodel). Now, what is the best approach to use our metamodel in stead of TOGAF in the Sparx EA? Is the use of UML Profiles the right (and the only) way? If so, should we extend UML or TOGAF Content Metamodel?

best regards
Ismar

philchudley

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 533
  • Karma: +9/-0
  • UML/EA Principal Consultant / Trainer
    • View Profile
Re: Adopting Content Metamodel of TOGAF 9
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2011, 07:32:58 pm »
My opinion would be to:


  • Create your own meta-model as a UML profile
  • Using Enterprise Architect's Profile mechanism, ensure this profile has its own toolbox and diagramming rules (for quick linking)
  • Create and deploy this as an MDG
TOGAF-9 defines that any meta-model can be used within the ADM, and you may use serveral meta-models during the ADM. EA allows this by simply changing the toolbox. Although I would not mix meta-models

As TOGAF-9 is already an MDG and contains a meta-model I think you would find it difficult, if not impossible to change the TOGAF meta model directly, and personally I would not even try this route.

Creating your own MDG UML profile meta-model is the way to go.

By the way, the user guide is very good at providing instruction of how to create Profiles and MDG

Cheers

Phil
follow me on Twitter

@SparxEAGuru

Ismar Slomic

  • EA Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Adopting Content Metamodel of TOGAF 9
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2011, 08:47:02 pm »
Phil,
thanks for your post. Im little bit unsure if the UML Profile will be the right mechanism describing an metamodel. In my opinion, there are differences between metamodelling and extending UML through UML Profiles. I think UML Profiles can be used only to define the metamodel objects (through Stereotypes), but im not sure how the relationship between metamodel object should be described by using UML Profiles.

Here is an example:

Lets say we got to Stereotypes:

Person => extends metaclass Class
House => extends metaclass Class

how can i describe relationship between concepts, i.e: Person <sells> House?

Ismar

Thelonius

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • I think. Therefore I get paid.
    • View Profile
Re: Adopting Content Metamodel of TOGAF 9
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2011, 08:01:05 am »
Ismar

I use the TOGAF 9 meta model very frequently. I find most of the stuff I need is there.

Haven't found a compelling reason for me - as an EA - to adopt Archimate.

Are you doing EA? Or are you doing SA?

What sort of architectures are you creating? Capability? Solution? Or are you mapping SBBs to ABBs and creating catalogues for roadmaps?

What shortcomings do you perceive wrt the TOGAF meta model?

NB: there are possibly more widely-viewed fora on LinkedIn where discussions of this nature are conducted ...

Jon