A comparative study of architecture knowledge management tools

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.08.032 Byline: Antony Tang (a), Paris Avgeriou (b), Anton Jansen (b), Rafael Capilla (c), Muhammad Ali Babar (d) Keywords: Architectural knowledge management tool; Architectural design; Design rationale Abstract: Recent research suggests that architectural knowledge, such as design decisions, is important and should be recorded alongside the architecture description. Different approaches have emerged to support such architectural knowledge (AK) management activities. However, there are different notions of and emphasis on what and how architectural activities should be supported. This is reflected in the design and implementation of existing AK tools. To understand the current status of software architecture knowledge engineering and future research trends, this paper compares five architectural knowledge management tools and the support they provide in the architecture life-cycle. The comparison is based on an evaluation framework defined by a set of 10 criteria. The results of the comparison provide insights into the current focus of architectural knowledge management support, their advantages, deficiencies, and conformance to the current architectural description standard. Based on the outcome of this comparison a research agenda is proposed for future work on AK tools. Author Affiliation: (a) Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia (b) University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands (c) Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain (d) University of Limerick, Ireland Article History: Received 14 July 2008; Revised 24 August 2009; Accepted 24 August 2009 Article Note: (footnote) [star] All authors have contributed equally to this work.