> [!tldr] A simplification of Archimate retaining the bulk of its practical utility
**Context** - all of this note is from the perspective of someone who would use [[Archimate]] to interface with *Normies* (i.e. not other in-the-weeds systems architects), but I also believe this is likely true even in inter-architect situations. Vaguely related to the idea that [[Experts are more Impressed by Simplicity]]. I'm not saying these things are *useless*, just that some things are clearly more often or broadly useful than others.
This is the palette from [[Archi]]:
![[Screenshot 2026-03-23 at 1.49.54 PM.png]]
| **Layer** | **Number of Constructs** |
| -------------- | :----------------------: |
| Relationships | 11 |
| Strategy | 4 |
| Business | 13 |
| Application | 9 |
| Technology | 13 |
| Physical | 4 |
| Motivation | 10 |
| Implementaiton | 5 |
| **Total** | **69** |
> [!warning] That's a lot.
> So there's roughly ~70 constructs you can use in various ways to say different things.
## Archimate Cookbook: Medium-sized Set
The [[Archimate Cookbook]] suggests a limited set:
![[Screenshot 2026-03-23 at 1.59.11 PM.png]]
| **Layer** | **Number of Constructs** | Removed |
| -------------- | :----------------------: | ---------------------------------------------------- |
| Relationships | 9 | (not sure actually) |
| Strategy | 3 | Value Stream |
| Business | 10 | Collaboration, interaction, contract |
| Application | 7 | Collaboration, interaction |
| Technology | 8 | Collaboration, interaction, path, function, process, |
| Physical | 0 | All physical elements |
| Motivation | 9 | Meaning |
| Implementaiton | 0 | All implementation elements |
| **Total** | **46** | |
Fewer, but still a lot. Basically removing an sense of *process* out of the technology layer and removing the notion of collaboration and interactions (both change I fully get behind), as well as disregarding implementation and physical concerns as things the language can handle.
## Barely Even Archimate - My Machete'd List
> [!warning] I know nothing. The people who designed this language are smarter than me.
This is sort of me approximating my hypothetical [[System & Process Ontology]] using Archimate metamodel elements.
- Entities
- **Role**
- **Component**
- **Process**
- **Service**
- **Object**
- **Event**
- **Value**
- Relationships
- **Composed of**
- **Realizes**
- **Serves**
- **Assigned to**
- **Flows**
Total constructs: 11
Also it does away with the distinction between the layers. They are just [[Entity Relationship Categories|entities and relationships]].
That gives us this smaller metamodel:
![[Pasted image 20260323154938.png]]
> [!warning] Ignore the arrow formatting
> Again this is using syntax *intentionally* wrong. [[Archi]] constrains the kids of arrows you can use, which goes to show my Machete'd list isn't even valid Archimate.
... you know after drawing this out I like it *less*.
****
# More
## Source
- self, ultimately, as informed by:
- https://www.hosiaisluoma.fi/blog/archimate/ - section 3 in particular
- ChatGPT, which I argued with