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 |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  Architecture arc42 |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. | 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. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung | 1-2 h | 1-2 Tage | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 Reviewer | 1-8 | 1-4 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | RFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or tickets | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Architecture Document, Context View, Runtime View, Deployment View | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | ArchitectureDocumentationCommunication | SensemakingDecisionRationale |