This is an old revision of the document!
Welcome to the Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) Wiki. This wiki provides information on the background of UAF, how to use UAF, and upcoming events and announcements related to the UAF.
UAF evolved from the Unified Profile for Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) and Ministry of Defence Architecture Framework (MODAF) (UPDM), version 2.1. UPDM is not a new architectural framework- it merges pre-existing concepts from DoDAF and MODAF into a combined metamodel. UPDM has been adopted by a wide variety of organizations, extending beyond the military and into federal and industry applications. Because of this, there was an increasing demand for UPDM to become more industrialized and to support other frameworks other than just DoDAF and MODAF. This led to the creation of UAF.
UAF extends the scope of UPDM and generalizes it to make it applicable to industry, federal, and military architectures. The core concepts in the UAF are based on: * DoDAF 2.0.2 Domain Metamodel (DM2) * MODAF ontological data exchange mechanism (MODEM) * Security Views from Canada's Department of National Defense Architecture Framework (DNDAF) * North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Architecture Framework (NAF) v4 DoDAF, MODEM, and NAF v4 are all based on the International Defence Enterprise Architecture Specification (IDEAS) ontology. The IDEAS-based format for the domain meta-model (DMM) allows for the implementation of UAF DMM in non-SysML based tools.
The UAF Specification consists of four parts: - UAF DMM: basis for all tool vendors - UAF Profile (UAFP): implementation of UAF in SysML - Traceability to other architecture frameworks - Search and Rescue (SAR) Example implementation of UAF The UAF DMM and Profile are both normative components of the specification, while the traceability and example components are non-normative. UAF can be implemented directly using the UAF DMM, or by using UAFP (for tool vendors that support SysML/UML), or by some other proprietary implementation. Building from one of these implementations, we can create either NAF v4, UAF, or DoDAF 2.0 views.
The UAF grid shows how UAF is organized into different view specifications.
Each row in this grid represents a different domain, and each column represents a different “model kind”. The “domains” can be thought of as the different parts of the underlying information model, while the “model kinds” can be thought of as different standard ways of representing that information. Each cell in the grid is a different view specification or “viewpoint”. UAF defines a metamodel for each viewpoint- the main concepts and relationships you need to build this specific viewpoint. Although the grid is a flat view, think of the information behind each viewpoint in the grid as interrelated. However, this grid view doesn’t really illustrate how the information is interrelated.
A better representation of how the information of each domain is interrelated can be seen below.
In this diagram, the horizontal boxes are stacked to represent how the domain on top ties to the domain below it. For example, the Strategic view is tied to the Operational view, which is tied to the Resources view, etc. The vertical boxes indicate that that domain spans across all the domains horizontally stacked within the vertical box’s height. For example, the Security view spans across the Operational view and the Personnel and Resources views because the Operational views help define the problem in the Security domain, whereas the Personnel and Resources views help define the solution for that domain. However, this diagram is a very high-level representation. If you would like to see more detail on which elements tie each of the domains together, a simplified version of the UAF information model can be seen below.
The “Behavior” column shows a thread between Capabilities (Strategic domain), the Operational Activities (Operational domain) which break down these Capabilities into logical domains, and the Functions (Resource domain) which maps these Operational Activities onto how they might be realized in the physical domain. The “Agent” column shows who exhibits the Capabilities or performs those behaviors.
The UAF model kinds can be mapped to some SysML diagrams, as seen in the table below.
|Model Kind||SysML Diagram|
|Taxonomy (Tx)||Block Definition Diagram (bdd)|
|Structure (Sr)||Block Definition Diagram (bdd) & Internal Block Diagram (ibd)|
|Connectivity (Cn)||Internal Block Diagram (ibd)|
|Processes (Pr)||Activity Diagram (act)|
|States (St)||State Machine Diagram (stm)|
|Interaction Scenarios (Is)||Sequence Diagram (sd)|
|Information (If)||Block Definition Diagram (bdd)|
|Parameters (Pm)||Block Definition Diagram (bdd)|
|Constrains (Ct)||Block Definition Diagram (bdd) & Parametric Diagram (par)|
|Summary & Overview (Sm-Ov)||Block Definition Diagram (bdd)|
|Requirements (Req)||Requirement Diagram (req)|
The Taxonomy (Tx), Connectivity (Cn), and Parameters (Pm) model kinds can also be thought of as tables. The rest of the model kinds do not have analogous SysML diagrams- however, the Roadmap (Rm) model kind can be thought of as a Gantt chart, the Traceability (Tr) model kind can be thought of as a matrix, and the Dictionary (Dc) model kind can be thought of as a table.
This section will give a brief summary of each of the different domains and model kinds shown in the UAF Grid.
Numerous presentations were delivered promoting the use of UAF in multiple different events worldwide:
OMG organised Information days for UAF: