Archimate Experiences with HOPEX

[BenAvdicevic]

Hello,
Looking to see how other people's experiences are with using Archimate with HOPEX?

I'm testing  it in HOPEX v5 running in a SaaS DEV environment.  NOt tried in PROD yet.

I get that some objects automatically map to HOPEX metaclass objects, while others do not.  It confusing  at first.  

The actual diagram drawing seems sluggish and clunky. 

Noticed that Archimate location shape covers up the lines - and must be manually "sent to back" to see them.

Also noticed there is no Archimate Note object.   Mega has its own Note - but it doesn't work the same.

Biggest challenge I see to get people to use Archimate with HOPEX - it is incomplete.  Architects MUST learn to model with MEGA notation.

[SergeThorn]

Hi @BenAvdicevic and @OLeGuellec 

As I'm evaluating at the moment the ArchiMate module and have been using ArchiMate for years, I may have other observations.

Re: If we tell our architects to model with Archimate - the repository stays incomplete.

You first need to realise that there is a metamodel mapping between Hopex and ArchiMate, which is partially done. You can extend that mapping if needed, which will be the case for me as many ArchiMate elements can be mapped to Hopex Metaclasses. To be done I understood with Hopex Power Studio.

Then there is a bit of process to implement. First start to add content in Hopex, such as Applications, Capabilities, etc… Then switch to ArchiMate and use the elements in your diagram. I believe that creating directly into your diagram is not appropriate because I’m not sure that everything is really created in the repository when new, or it may but not be properly documented. At least I observed that relationships are not in the repository, which is OK as this is another metamode. Use ArchiMate only as a diagramming tool on the top of Hopex and you will be “safe”.

Re: For example - In Archimate, internal structure of application is modeled also with Application Component object.  

I would tend to challenge this. Internal structure of applications may mean various things:

• Application components may aggregate other Applications Components (just add other Hopex Applications)
• Application components may have Applications Functions (that I will map to Hopex Applications Functionalities)
• Application components may have Applications Processes and Services (you can also map to Hopex Applications Services)

Re: This is a problem.   Hopex doesn't let you map Archimate Application Component to Hopex Microservice or IT Service object.

Hopex Microservice is a type of Application from an ArchiMate perspective, maybe we could map the Application Component to also Hopex Microservice (Mapping to two metaclasses, MEGA to confirm).

IT service is from what I understood an error. It should be Application Service (the documentation use Application Service, the Tool IT service, but it is the same thing. Hope this will be corrected. And as already said, you can map the Application Services).

RE: Slow and sluggish  

I haven’t had any problem.

Hope it helps.

[BenAvdicevic]

Hi @OLeGuellec 

Thanks for replying.

Re: The incomplete comment.

If we tell our architects to model with Archimate - the repository stays incomplete.

For example - In Archimate, internal structure of application is modeled also with Application Component object .  

This is a problem.   Hopex doesn't let you map Archimate Application Component to Hopex Microservice or IT Service object.  Hence, the HOPEX repository stays incomplete..  If you want to capture those relationships in HOPEX - for all the reporting and analysis - you must model the internal structure of an application with an IT Servie or Microservice object separately.

This is true for all the other Archimate objects that are not mapped to HOPEX objects.

RE: Location shape and nesting issue

Yes. you're right.  HOPEX doesn't handle the nesting smartly.  It doesn't push the parent object to the back.

RE: Slow and sluggish  

Not sure if this is our DEV environment issue.  But honestly - its so slow - its hard to use at all.  I'll have to wait to test in PREPROD when its ready. Are there known performance issues with Archimate?

When I  drag Application Component on top of  a Location object - to create that nesting relationship - HOPEX doesn't create the nesting relationship every time.  In my experience I had to try several times (by moving the application object out of location shape and then back on top of it).

Also, just loading Archimate diagrams seemed slow compared to loading diagrams with  native MEGA notation. 

RE: Note object

I just like the simplicity of the Note object in Archi - and the look and feel of it.

[OLeGuellec]

Hi,

"I get that some objects automatically map to HOPEX metaclass objects, while others do not. It confusing at first."

This aims at achieving a bridge between the ArchiMate world and other languages/notations, so that an ArchiMate Process can be detailed using a BPMN diagram, for instance.

"Noticed that Archimate location shape covers up the lines - and must be manually "sent to back" to see them."

I guess this relates to the nesting behavior ? Nesting an object within another object suggest the creation of structural relationships, which by default are placed behind the foreground objects layer.

"Also noticed there is no Archimate Note object. Mega has its own Note - but it doesn't work the same."

I am not aware of a normative guideline or requirement here regarding an 'ArchiMate note' object in AM 3.1, so we use the HOPEX standard note ... when you say it does not 'work the same', what do you have in mind ? Archi's implementation ?

Of course, this is taken into account by the import / export in the open exchange format.

note: in HOPEX you also have 'review notes' on top the these diagramming annotations, which provide additional collaboration possibilities.

"Biggest challenge I see to get people to use Archimate with HOPEX - it is incomplete. Architects MUST learn to model with MEGA notation."

What do you mean by 'incomplete' ?