Clarification regarding "Organization hierarchy specialization"
In LSA course on "Organization hierarchy specialization" it is written
"For example, some companies are so large that you can write applications specifically for one division. The code within those applications is likely not shared with other divisions. For such scenarios, you specialize case type class names containing a division modifier. For example:
ORG-DIV-APP-[Work/Data/int]-"
My question is since applications are not being shared with other division why dont we create class structure like
ORG-APP1-[Work/Data/Int] ORG-APP2-[Work/Data/Int]. In this case we can keep the class name length in control and also reusable component will remain in ORG layer just like ORG-DIV-APP-[Work/Data/int]-
In LSA course on "Organization hierarchy specialization" it is written
"For example, some companies are so large that you can write applications specifically for one division. The code within those applications is likely not shared with other divisions. For such scenarios, you specialize case type class names containing a division modifier. For example:
ORG-DIV-APP-[Work/Data/int]-"
My question is since applications are not being shared with other division why dont we create class structure like
ORG-APP1-[Work/Data/Int] ORG-APP2-[Work/Data/Int]. In this case we can keep the class name length in control and also reusable component will remain in ORG layer just like ORG-DIV-APP-[Work/Data/int]-
Please clarify what I am missing here
Pegasystems Inc.
US
You could do this if you wanted. The whoile goal to create a structure that will maximize re-use across the organization. In a company, you would use your Lead System Architect as the expert to help create a class structure that maximizes re-useabilty, ease of understanding and simplicity.
Thanks,
Bill rahert
Pegasystems Inc.
US
The value used for DIV would typically be only 3 letters. Adding a dash would only add 4 letters to the class name.
"DIV" acts as a namespace differentiator.
You are correct that it is not necessary to use "DIV" but then you must rely on "APP" entirely to differentiate one application from another
You cannot tell by looking at the name which classes exclusively belong to a division as opposed to classes that belong to the entire organization.