Where’s the line between [IT] architecture and design?

Posted on By Mark Wilson
This content is 11 years old. I don't routinely update old blog posts as they are only intended to represent a view at a particular point in time. Please be warned that the information here may be out of date.

This week, I’m attending a training course on the architecture and design of distributed enterprise systems and yesterday morning, somewhat mischievously, I asked the course instructor where he draws the distinction between architecture and design.

We explored an analogy based about a traditional (building) architect in which I suggested an architect knows the methods and materials to use but would not actually carry out the construction work. But the instructor, Selvyn Wright, made an interesting point – if we admire a building for it’s stunning architecture, often we’re talking about the design. Instead, he suggested that architecture is a style or philosophy whereas design is about the detail.

In the UK IT industry, the last 10 years or so have seen a trend towards “architect” job roles in business and IT. Maybe this is because the UK is one of the few countries where to be a great engineer is discouraged and technical skills are undervalued, rather than being held up as a worthy profession.

In reality, there is a grey line between an architect and a designer and I had frequent conversations with my previous manager on the topic (usually whilst discussing my own development on the path towards enterprise architecture – another commonly mis-used term, probably best saved for another post). Regardless, architecture and design do get mixed (in an IT context) and there comes a point in the transition when one can look back and say “ah yes, now I understand”.

I suggest that point is when someone is able to abstract the logical capabilities of a system from the technology itself. At that point, they’ve probably crossed the line from a designer to an architect.

In other words, an architect can understand the business problem from a logical perspective and create one or more possible solutions. The required capabilities are the logical model and the physical elements are those which need be bought, built or reused to match those capabilities. Architecture is about recognising and employing patterns.

Having decided what an architect is, we come to the issue of design. Indeed, design is a word more often used in a creative sense – a website designer, for example, has a distinct set of skills that are very different to those of a website developer. Ditto for a user interface designer or for a user experience designer. Within the context of the architect vs. designer debate, however, a designer can be viewed as someone whose task it is to work out how to configure the physical elements of the solution and create designs for elements of software applications, or of IT infrastructure.

Architect or designer, either way, I still struggle with the term “architected”. Designed seems to be a more grammatically correct use of English (adding further complexity to the design vs. architecture debate) but it seems increasingly common to architect (as a verb) these days…

Culinary creations and “International English”

Posted on By Mark Wilson
This content is 12 years old. I don't routinely update old blog posts as they are only intended to represent a view at a particular point in time. Please be warned that the information here may be out of date.

As a bit of a foodie, I’ve always enjoyed creating meals although, if I’m perfectly honest, I normally do the “glory cooking” when we’re entertaining friends, and my wife looks after much of the everyday food preparation.

Right now, Mrs W. is very busy in her work (for which I’m very grateful – freelancers need to “make hay whilst the sun shines”!) and that means that I need to pick up a few more tasks around the house. Combined with my need to eat healthily and carefully count calories (I still have another 5kg to lose before the end of March) I’m currently taking on most of the responsibility for our meals, spending a good chunk of the last two weekends in the kitchen, with a good share of my culinary creations heading towards the freezer for use as ready meals.

I’m no Masterchef contender, but my food generally seems to go down well, and it’s good to try something different from time to time. Last weekend, I was creating a Spanish-inspired meal for friends and I decided to make Crema Catalana for desert.  The recipe I followed is pretty simple but I found myself thrown by two things:

  1. “Cups” of ingredients (give me grammes, or even pounds and ounces).
  2. Strange terms like cornstarch (could that be cornflour?)

I finally found a use for a kitchen computer as, with a little help from my smartphone, I had determined that quantity in a “cup” depends on the product. There’s a handy reference at AllRecipes.com. So that was number 1 sorted. As for 2., well, yes “cornstarch” is what we, in England, call “cornflour” and there’s a useful Wikipedia entry on “International English” food terms.

[English is the language spoken by (most) people in England and adopted by many other nations. Some of the variations even make sense (color instead of colour, for example) but I speak, read and write English – and find the term “International English” to be nonsensical. There is English, and there is American, Australian, etc. I know that languages constantly evolve, but… OK, I’ll come down off my soapbox now.]

My time in the kitchen is not normally a topic for this blog but I thought these references might be useful for others. As well as for me, next time I’m confused by a recipe written in “International English”.