Author Topic: Question on using Junction  (Read 143 times)

xiaoqi

  • Active Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 42
  • Today is the Tomorrow we talked about Yesterday
Question on using Junction
« on: March 26, 2021, 22:32:29 PM »
Hello,

One question need your advise about using Junction notation.

Read from the ArchiMate's ArchiSurance case study, the "Using-Junction-1.png" is from Figure 13 in page 19, three business functions are realizing one capability "Claim Management", to have view clearer, junction is good in the middle, but when I try to draw this via Archi tool, see the 2nd picture, I cannot prevent to have the 3 incoming Realization arrows to the junction point.

I saw similar drawings in other books and articles, just want to understand is there a way in our Archi tool to make those incoming arrows invisible, or it is actually using some other relations? (I think it should all keep using Realization relation so that we can export to analyze in the correct result.)

Thanks,
Xiaoqi

Phil Beauvoir

  • Archi Guy
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1500
  • Archi Guy
    • Archi
Re: Question on using Junction
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2021, 22:52:49 PM »
The ArchiMate 3.1 spec says (5.5.1) "It is allowed to omit arrowheads of relationships leading into a junction"

This isn't implemented in Archi at the moment, perhaps this is something that could be implemented in a future version.
If you value and use Archi please consider making a donation! https://www.archimatetool.com/donate

xiaoqi

  • Active Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 42
  • Today is the Tomorrow we talked about Yesterday
Re: Question on using Junction
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2021, 22:57:41 PM »
Thanks Phil, now understand, and since this is not a mandatory "omitting", I can see the different views in their same documents are not following strict way (as another usage in the page 20).

Good to know the status in our Archi tool, it's fine for me as I don't think it's one urgent needs, and furthermore, having all arrows still visible can make the view more readable.

Regards,
Xiaoqi