The AV-2 presents all the metadata used in an architecture and presents all the data as a hierarchy, provides a text definition for each one and references the source of the. It also shows elements from the DoDAF Meta-model that have been described in the Architectural Description and new elements that have been introduced by the Architectural Description.
It is essential that organizations within the DoD use the same terms to refer to a thing. Because of the interrelationship among models and across architecture efforts, it is useful to define common terminology with common definitions (referred to as taxonomies) in the development of the models within the Architectural Description. These taxonomies can be used as building blocks for DoDAF-described Models and Fit-for-Purpose Views within the Architectural Description. Use of taxonomies to build models for the architecture has the following benefits over free-text labeling:
- Provides consistency across populated views, based on DoDAF-described Models.
- Provides consistency across Architectural Descriptions.
- Facilitates Architectural Description development, validation, maintenance, and re-use.
- Traces architectural data to authoritative data sources.
The purpose of the AV-2 is to provide a means to explain the terms and abbreviations used in building the architecture and, as necessary, submit them for review and inclusion into authoritative vocabularies developed by COIs that are pertinent to the Architectural Description content.
In the creation of any Architectural Description, reuse of authoritative external taxonomy content, e.g., the FEA Reference Models, or the Joint Common System Function List, or any listed in Architecture Resources, are important to aligning the architectural content across many descriptions to increase their understandability, interoperability, Architecture Federation, and compliance.
The AV-2 content can be organized by the following areas within the DM2 that can be used to expedite architecture development:
- Capabilities: The taxonomy should minimally consist of names, descriptions, and conditions that may be applicable to performance measures.
- Resource Flow: The taxonomy should minimally consist of names of information elements exchanged, descriptions, decomposition into constituent parts and subtypes, and mapping to system data elements exchanged.
- Activities (Operational Activities or Tasks): The taxonomy should minimally consist of names, descriptions, and decomposition into the constituent parts that comprise an activity.
- Activities (System or Service Functions): The taxonomy should minimally consist of names, descriptions, and decomposition into the constituent parts that comprise a system function.
- Performance Parameters: The taxonomy should minimally consist of names, descriptions, units of measure, and conditions that may be applicable to performance parameters.
- Performers: Performers can be persons, services, systems or organizations. The taxonomy should minimally consist of names, descriptions, breakdowns into constituent parts (e.g., a services comprising other services), and applicable categorizations. Each of the above types of performers is a candidate for a being a taxonomy.
- Skills: The taxonomy should minimally consist of names, descriptions, units of measure, and conditions that may be applicable to performance parameters.
- Standards: The taxonomy should minimally consist of categories of standards (e.g., DoD Information Technology Standards and Profile Registry (DISR) Service Areas).
- Triggers/Events: The taxonomy minimally consists of names, descriptions, and breakdown into constituent parts of the event or trigger and categorization of types of events or triggers.
- The DoDAF descriptions in this website are very generic and are mostly taken from the DoDAF Architecture Framework website. Make sure you visit the actual website for the most update information and a more thorough explanation of each viewpoint.
- DoDAF Version 1.0, although outdated, has some good examples on how to construct AV’s, OV’s, and SV’s.
AcqLinks and References:
-  DoDAF Architecture Framework Version 2.02
- DoD Architecture Framework Working Group Version 1.0, Volume 1: Definition and Guideline, 9 Feb 04 (Old Version)
- DoD Architecture Framework Version 1.0, Volume 2: Product Description, 9 Feb 04 (Old Version)
- Website: DoDAF Architecture Framework – DoD Deputy Chief Information Officer
- Website: DoDAF Version 2.02 Journal
- Website: DoDAF Meta Model (DM2)
- Website: DoD Information Enterprise Architecture
- Website: OMB Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework (EAAF)