View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Domain Modeling Context Map |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Domain Modeling Bounded Context Canvas |  Architecture Request for Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When several contexts need to talk to each other, it makes their relationships and dependencies legible. It helps sort integration pressure and responsibilities across system boundaries. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | When a business context is still loosely outlined, it shapes language, responsibility, and integration space. It clarifies what belongs together and where a boundary needs to hold. | An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 15-45 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-3 | 3-8 | 3-20 Reviewer |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Context Map, Integration Patterns, Boundary Notes | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Context Canvas, Glossary, Integration Notes | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets |
Tagsno overlap | Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesStrategy | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | Domain-Driven DesignBoundariesModeling | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance |