Governments need education in software architecture

CBDi explicitly states that this is NOT an April Fool!

Check out their article how EU ensures chaos in media components.


They question the EU government’s understanding of the following definitions:

  • A component is a set of functionality that offers well defined capabilities through interfaces. A good component will hide the internals completely from the user, and allow its capabilities to be invoked with no knowledge of HOW the component is implemented. 

  • A good component has therefore minimum dependencies and is easily replaceable. 

  • A good component establishes or complies with interface and behavioral standards that stimulate the growth of an ecosystem of collaborating components.

  • A good component creates value for its provider through widespread reuse

Comments (2)
  1. Anonymous says:

    Interesting — and not only goverment administration!

    I’ve always thought that LAWMAKERS need to know some good programming practices. Every law seems to be poorly modularized. Laws are extremely tightly bound both to subsidiary laws, as well as unrelated laws. Laws are poorly parameterized — often constants are embedded within it, rather that in a controlling component. There is little thought to the interfaces to a particular body of law. Laws are often very rigid. Testing is very poor. Many laws don’t take into account all the real-world situations. It is difficult, if not impossible, to repeal/rewrite small bits of law that cause a whole body of law to have weaknesses. There is little-to-no architecting of the the law in coherent systems, subsystems, components, services, classes, interfaces, methods, properties, and the like.

    Refactor law! Refactor law! Refactor law!

  2. Anonymous says:

    Great comment!

    I already see the campaign: “Software architects go politicians” 😉

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content