Feedback on the Common web application architectures article #33840
Description
Type of issue
Other (describe below)
Description
This issue has been moved from a ticket on Developer Community.
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my concern and dissatisfaction with the article titled “Common web application architectures” that is published on the Microsoft Learn website. In particular, I have an issue with the section that describes the Clean Architecture.
The article claims that the Clean Architecture is a generic term that has gone by many names over the years, such as Hexagonal Architecture, Ports-and-Adapters, Onion Architecture, etc. It then proceeds to describe a custom architecture that has nothing to do with the original Clean Architecture as defined by Robert C. Martin in his book of the same name.
This is misleading, inaccurate, and disrespectful to the author and his work. The Clean Architecture is not a generic term, but a specific architecture that has a clear definition and structure. It is based on a set of principles and rules that aim to make software systems more understandable, maintainable, testable, and independent of frameworks, databases, or external agencies. It consists of four main layers:
- Enterprise Business Rules (Entities);
- Application Business Rules (Use Cases);
- Interface Adapters;
- Frameworks and Drivers.
The architecture that the article describes introduces new terms and layers that are not part of the Clean Architecture, such as Application Core, Infrastructure, and UI. It also mixes up different architectures and patterns that are not equivalent or interchangeable with the Clean Architecture, such as Hexagonal Architecture, Ports-and-Adapters, Onion Architecture, etc.
These architectures and patterns may have some similarities or overlaps with the Clean Architecture, but they are not the same thing. They have different origins, definitions, structures, and goals. They may also have different advantages and disadvantages depending on the context and requirements of each project. To lump them together under one name and present them as one architecture is confusing and misleading for the readers.
Therefore, I urge you to change the title and content of the section that describes the Clean Architecture. You should either describe the Clean Architecture as it is defined by Robert C. Martin in his book, without making up new terms and layers, or you should not mention the Clean Architecture at all and use a different name for your custom architecture. This way, you will avoid misinforming and misguiding your readers and respect the author and his work.
Thank you for your attention and consideration.
Sincerely,
Dmytro Turskyi
Original Comments
Tracy Wang [MSFT] on 6/18/2023, 05:34 PM:
We have converted this feedback item to a suggestion. This change was done to better reflect the feedback’s nature. It will allow other developers to easily find it and engage on it.
Feedback Bot on 6/18/2023, 07:34 PM:
Thank you for taking the time to provide your suggestion. We will do some preliminary checks to make sure we can proceed further. You will hear from us in about a week on our next steps.
Page URL
Content source URL
Document Version Independent Id
b227c667-82ae-97ef-c175-7e17051c5ab2