In search of `architectural knowledge'

ABSTRACT

The software architecture community puts more and more emphasis on 'architectural knowledge'. However, there appears to be no commonly accepted definition of what architectural knowledge entails, which makes it a fuzzy concept. In order to obtain a better understanding of how different authors view 'architectural knowledge', we have conducted a systematic review to examine how architectural knowledge is defined and how the different definitions in use are related. From this review it became clear that many authors do not provide a concrete definition of what they think architectural knowledge entails. What is more intriguing, though, is that those who do give a definition seem to agree that architectural knowledge spans from problem domain through decision making to solution; an agreement that is not obvious from the definitions themselves, but which is only brought to light after careful systematic comparison of the different studies.

REFERENCES

• 1: Paris Avgeriou , Philippe Kruchten , Patricia Lago , Paul Grisham , Dewayne Perry, Sharig and Reusing Architectural Knowledge--Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent, Companion to the proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Software Engineering, p.109-110, May 20-26, 2007 [doi>10.1109/ICSECOMPANION.2007.65]
• 2: Muhammad Ali Babar , Ian Gorton, A Tool for Managing Software Architecture Knowledge, Proceedings of the Second Workshop on SHAring and Reusing architectural Knowledge Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent, p.11, May 20-26, 2007 [doi>10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.1]
• 3: M. A. Babar, I. Gorton, and B. Kitchenham. A Framework for Supporting Architecture Knowledge and Rationale Management. In Rationale Management in Software Engineering, pages 237--254. 2006.
• 4: R. Bahsoon. Defining Dependable Dynamic Data-Driven Software Architectures. In IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration, (IRI), pages 691--694, 2007.
• 5: J. Biolchini, P. G. Mian, A. C. C. Natali, and G. H. Travassos. Systematic Review in Software Engineering. Technical Report ES 679 / 05, May 2005.
• 6: E. Carayannis and J. Coleman. Creative System Design Methodologies: the Case of Complex Technical Systems. Technovation, 25(8):831--840, 2005.
• 7: S. Chen. Task Partitioning in New Product Development Teams: A Knowledge and Learning Perspective. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 22(4):291--314, 2005.
• 8: Remco C. de Boer , Hans van Vliet, Constructing a Reading Guide for Software Product Audits, Proceedings of the Sixth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, p.11, January 06-09, 2007 [doi>10.1109/WICSA.2007.20]
• 9: Tore Dyba , Torgeir Dingsoyr , Geir K. Hanssen, Applying Systematic Reviews to Diverse Study Types: An Experience Report, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, p.225-234, September 20-21, 2007 [doi>10.1109/ESEM.2007.21]
• 10: R. Farenhorst, P. Lago, and H. van Vliet. Effective Tool Support for Architectural Knowledge Sharing. In 1st European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA), pages 123--138, Aranjuez (Madrid), Spain, 2007.
• 11: John C. Georgas , Richard N. Taylor, Towards a knowledge-based approach to architectural adaptation management, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT workshop on Self-managed systems, p.59-63, October 31-November 01, 2004, Newport Beach, California [doi>10.1145/1075405.1075417]
• 12: Ibrahim Habli , Tim Kelly, Capturing and Replaying Architectural Knowledge through Derivational Analogy, Proceedings of the Second Workshop on SHAring and Reusing architectural Knowledge Architecture, Rationale, and Design Intent, p.4, May 20-26, 2007 [doi>10.1109/SHARK-ADI.2007.6]
• 13: Elizabeth A. Kendall, Utilizing patterns and pattern languages in education, Annals of Software Engineering, v.6 n.1-4, p.281-294, April 1999 [doi>10.1023/A:1018965616927]
• 14: B. Kitchenham. Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Technical Report TR/SE-0401 and NICTA Technical Report 0400011T.1., Keele University, 2004.
• 15: Philippe Kruchten , Patricia Lago , Hans van Vliet , Timo Wolf, Building up and Exploiting Architectural Knowledge, Proceedings of the 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, p.291-292, November 06-10, 2005 [doi>10.1109/WICSA.2005.19]
• 16: Philippe Kruchten , Patricia Lago , Hans van Vliet , Timo Wolf, Building up and Exploiting Architectural Knowledge, Proceedings of the 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, p.291-292, November 06-10, 2005 [doi>10.1109/WICSA.2005.19]
• 17: Philippe Kruchten , Henk Obbink , Judith Stafford, The Past, Present, and Future for Software Architecture, IEEE Software, v.23 n.2, p.22-30, March 2006 [doi>10.1109/MS.2006.59]
• 18: Patricia Lago , Paris Avgeriou, First workshop on sharing and reusing architectural knowledge, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, v.31 n.5, September 2006 [doi>10.1145/1163514.1163526]
• 19: L. Lee and P. Kruchten. Capturing Software Architectural Design Decisions. In P. Kruchten, editor, Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE), pages 686--689, 2007.
• 20: G. Noblit and R. Hare. Meta-Ethnography: Synthesising Qualitative Studies. Sage, Newbury Park, California, 1988.
• 21: K. Pohl and E. Sikora. Structuring the Co-design of Requirements and Architecture. In Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, pages 48--62. 2007.
• 22: Alexander Ran , Juha Kuusela, Design Decision Trees, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Software Specification and Design, p.172, March 22-23, 1996
• 23: J. S. van der Ven, A. Jansen, J. Nijhuis, and J. Bosch. Design decisions: The Bridge between Rationale and Architecture. In A. Dutoit, editor, Rationale Management in Software Engineering, pages 329--346. Springer-Verlag, 2006.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
        D.2.11 Software Architectures

General Terms:
Design

Keywords:
architectural knowledge, systematic review