Comments on: How does the user language fit in with the ubiquitous language? http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/01/10/how-does-the-user-language-fit-in-with-the-ubiquitous-language/ Thoughts on Software Development Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Phillip Calçado http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/01/10/how-does-the-user-language-fit-in-with-the-ubiquitous-language/comment-page-1/#comment-2667 Phillip Calçado Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:33:55 +0000 http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=838#comment-2667 The translation will always happen unless you have a single domain (thus a single Ubiquitous Language). I think you probably have to face the fact that this is necessary and not try to escape from it. Create Bounded Contexts for you two Domains and define a Context Map. Wrap everything with integration tests and you're good. The translation will always happen unless you have a single domain (thus a single Ubiquitous Language).

I think you probably have to face the fact that this is necessary and not try to escape from it. Create Bounded Contexts for you two Domains and define a Context Map. Wrap everything with integration tests and you’re good.

]]> By: Brian Marick http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/01/10/how-does-the-user-language-fit-in-with-the-ubiquitous-language/comment-page-1/#comment-2660 Brian Marick Sun, 11 Jan 2009 02:06:53 +0000 http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=838#comment-2660 There's been some research in science studies about "boundary objects" as a way of aligning different communities toward common goals. I wrote a summary here: http://visibleworkings.com/analogyfest/marick-boundary-objects.pdf A related idea is Fujimura's "packages" (paper in _Science as Practice and Culture_) and Galison's "trading zones" (in _Image and Logic_). I like boundary objects and packages because they're not purely linguistic - there are also things involved, so they are closer to software (which is a linguistic construct, in a way, but related to as a thing). I've wanted to dig into these ideas more, but other things keep getting in the way. There’s been some research in science studies about “boundary objects” as a way of aligning different communities toward common goals. I wrote a summary here: http://visibleworkings.com/analogyfest/marick-boundary-objects.pdf

A related idea is Fujimura’s “packages” (paper in _Science as Practice and Culture_) and Galison’s “trading zones” (in _Image and Logic_).

I like boundary objects and packages because they’re not purely linguistic – there are also things involved, so they are closer to software (which is a linguistic construct, in a way, but related to as a thing).

I’ve wanted to dig into these ideas more, but other things keep getting in the way.

]]>