On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Agreedon ROA , its a design approach not an architectural one.
The supposed distinction between design and architecture is arguably the most fallacious distinction ever proposed. While there is certainly a distinction between general (or conceptual or abstract or high level or strategic) design and specific (or implementation or concrete or low level or tactical) design, the same distinction can be made between general vs. specific architecture. Both architecture and design refer to the components of a system and the relationships among them. See IEEE-1471. Can anyone point to ANY well-established distinction between design per se (eg not "detailed design") and architecture per se (eg not just "building architecture")? All I've seen are people's personal opinions on the subject and endless, fruitless bickering on whether or how they are distinct.
