I4 (2 points)
https://knobit.org/id/task/da-architecture-decision-records/I4
Also as Turtle · JSON-LD · RDF/XML
| dcterms:license | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
|---|---|
| owl:sameAs | https://bitbucket.org/reffa/ontology/id/task/da-architecture-decision-records/I4 |
| rdfs:label | I4 (2 points) en |
| schema:hasPart | da-architecture-decision-records I4: G-2 states no business drivers |
| schema:hasPart | da-architecture-decision-records I4: G-6 rates readiness risk low against its evidence |
| schema:hasPart | da-architecture-decision-records I4: G-8 publishes architecture as a document, not a practice |
| schema:hasPart | da-architecture-decision-records I4: G-9 measures ADR counts, not compliance or value |
| schema:identifier | I4 |
| schema:position | 6 |
| schema:text | Gate-pack notes on drivers and practice, 0.5 each; each needs a finding naming the note with the right reason. (a) G-2: the purpose names technology fashion, not business drivers: it should state the business needs the target serves (for example reconciled risk reporting, fewer stores to run, faster analytics) or ask the sponsor for them. (b) G-6: readiness is rated low risk against its own evidence (no sponsor, governance maturity level 1, no data architect in the platform teams): the rating is raised, or a sponsor and readiness actions are asked for. (c) G-8: the target is published as a PDF that projects may consult: architecture must become a practice projects follow, for example an architecture review or consultation step in the project lifecycle. (d) G-9: ADRs written per quarter is an activity count: metrics of standards compliance, implementation progress and business value instead. en |