View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Request for Comments |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Architecture arc42 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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 content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | arc42 structures architecture knowledge so teams can document system, decisions, and risks consistently. The template builds a living understanding of the architecture instead of scattered notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 15-45 min | 20-45 min | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-3 | Based on research question | 1-4 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication |