Interesting but I don't think this especially adds anything. The high level diagrams are great but then you can already make those without having to read any fancy visual model websites. The site even kind of admits this:
> As an industry, we do have the Unified Modeling Language (UML), ArchiMate and SysML, but asking whether these provide an effective way to communicate software architecture is often irrelevant because many teams have already thrown them out in favour of much simpler "boxes and lines" diagrams.
This is very true, but then they seem to have ignored the reasons why UML class diagrams were a total failure. They somehow acknowledge that nobody likes them, but then the 4th C of their model (code) is... UML class diagrams!
You don't need this. Just do ad-hoc diagrams and make them clear, with labelled arrows. Their first three diagrams are actually good examples of this.
> As an industry, we do have the Unified Modeling Language (UML), ArchiMate and SysML, but asking whether these provide an effective way to communicate software architecture is often irrelevant because many teams have already thrown them out in favour of much simpler "boxes and lines" diagrams.
This is very true, but then they seem to have ignored the reasons why UML class diagrams were a total failure. They somehow acknowledge that nobody likes them, but then the 4th C of their model (code) is... UML class diagrams!
You don't need this. Just do ad-hoc diagrams and make them clear, with labelled arrows. Their first three diagrams are actually good examples of this.