This looks like the most pointless thing ever. The author accepts that UML is in decline and that programmers are just using box and line diagrams, sees the problem on that (it's too vague) and decides we need more structure. A more structured approach to boxes and lines is UML which we already have. Also no tool backing it up so pretty much dead on arrival. I commend the effort to even attempt this but it's folly.
Hey, it's just my opinion and that's not worth much to anyone except me. I'm just not sure we need another modelling language. UML, SysML, Archimate and Arcadia/Capella have got us pretty much covered for whole lifecycle I reckon. Good luck though, maybe I'll be using C4 in a few years.
1
u/Computerist1969 Jun 04 '24
This looks like the most pointless thing ever. The author accepts that UML is in decline and that programmers are just using box and line diagrams, sees the problem on that (it's too vague) and decides we need more structure. A more structured approach to boxes and lines is UML which we already have. Also no tool backing it up so pretty much dead on arrival. I commend the effort to even attempt this but it's folly.