Talk:Fundamentals of System Definition

I think that the tone of this article and its content are appropriate to put to public review. My main reaction to this article is that it seems to cover a huge span of material. The other articles I have read to date do not seem to cover such a broad span of material and so this raises the question of the relative balance of span of material and weight of importance of the various articles. I think the references in this article are appropriate. I think that the authors of this article have responded to comments by earlier discussants in an appropriate manner.

Garry Roedler: Too many of the sections in the article read as a tutorial without specific citations or references provided. These should be summarized further with pointers to the literature.

The discussion of the Recursive approach to system decomposition is appropriate here. This further illustrates the need to move the more general discussion of iteration and recursion from the System Definition introduction and combine it with the similar discussion in the Part 3 Introduction.

The history of Architecture is not needed here. None of hte other Topics in Part 3 discuss the history of the topic.

The definition of the term Architecture should be accomplished through the Glossary. The glossary can provide more than one definition if it is appropriate.

Primary references should have links to the reference articles.

The material provided is good. The primary references are good.

The article does not provide guidance to the Book of Knowledge. This can be remedied by providing more of an overview and guidance that connects to the primary references and leads the reader to the key materials and points.

The references to architecture methods, like DoDAF, in the first paragraph is premature and should be held until later.

Architecture definition should be the later article on Architecture.

Because this is an overview it seems like it should be shorter with more guidance and less specific information.