EA on a Page Primer & Modeling Guide — Evidence-Based EA Practice with Linked.Archi¶

This guide introduces the EA on a Page framework as formalised in Linked.Archi, explains how its concepts map to semantic assets, and demonstrates practical modeling through worked examples.

Phase 1 — Understanding EA on a Page¶

What is EA on a Page?¶

EA on a Page is an evidence-based enterprise architecture framework created by Svyatoslav Kotusev, based on empirical research across 27+ organizations. Unlike prescriptive frameworks (TOGAF, Zachman), EA on a Page describes how EA practices actually work rather than prescribing how they should work.

The framework classifies: - 24 EA artifacts into 6 types (the CSVLOD taxonomy) - 3 core EA processes that revolve around those artifacts - 4 maturity stages describing how EA practices evolve - Governance arrangements including architecture tiers and governance bodies

"Enterprise architecture is not a single methodology or framework. It is a collection of specific planning practices that organizations use to align their IT assets with business needs." — Svyatoslav Kotusev, The Practice of Enterprise Architecture (2021)

References: - Kotusev, S. (2021). The Practice of Enterprise Architecture: A Modern Approach to Business and IT Alignment. 2nd ed. SK Publishing. - Kotusev, S. (2024). Enterprise Architects: The Agents of Digital Transformation. SK Publishing. - Kotusev, S. (2016). The CSVLOD Model of Enterprise Architecture. BCS. - EA on a Page

The CSVLOD Taxonomy — Six Artifact Types¶

EA on a Page classifies all EA artifacts into six general types, forming the acronym CSVLOD:

Type	Nature	Focus	Scope	Lifecycle	What it provides
Considerations	Rules	Business	Organization-wide	Permanent	Governance rules — principles, policies, guidelines
Standards	Rules	IT	Organization-wide	Permanent	Proven solutions — technology reference models, patterns
Visions	Structures	Business	Organization-wide	Long-lived	Future state — capability models, target architectures, roadmaps
Landscapes	Structures	IT	Organization-wide	Long-lived	Current state — landscape diagrams, inventories, portfolios
Outlines	Changes	Business	Initiative-scoped	Short-lived	Initiative architecture — solution overviews, options assessments
Designs	Changes	IT	Project-scoped	Short-lived	Detailed specs — solution designs, preliminary solution designs

The CSVLOD taxonomy has two orthogonal dimensions for classifying EA artifacts:

Dimension 1 — Nature (what do artifacts describe?):

Nature	Describes	Question answered	Lifecycle	Purpose
Rules	General global rules defining an organization	How do we work or want to work?	Permanent, periodically updated	Consistency and homogeneity of planning decisions
Structures	High-level structures of an organization	What approximately do we have or want to have?	Permanent, continuously updated	Understand what changes are desirable
Changes	Specific proposed incremental changes	What exactly are we going to change right now?	Temporary, then discarded	Plan separate changes in detail

Dimension 2 — Focus (how do artifacts describe objects?):

Focus	Language	Stakeholders	Role
Business-Focused	Technology-neutral, plain business language	Business leaders and architects	Communication interfaces between business and IT
IT-Focused	Technical, IT-specific language	Architects and IT specialists	Internal IT tools invisible to business

Business-focused artifacts are always dual — they convey one meaning to business executives and another to architects. IT-focused artifacts are developed by architects alone and are largely invisible to business.

block-beta
    columns 3
    space:1 b["Business-focused"] i["IT-focused"]
    r["Rules<br/>(permanent)"] C["Considerations<br/>Principles, Policies"] S["Standards<br/>Tech Ref Models,<br/>Guidelines, Patterns"]
    s["Structures<br/>(long-lived)"] V["Visions<br/>Capability Models,<br/>Roadmaps,<br/>Target States"] L["Landscapes<br/>Landscape Diagrams,<br/>Inventories, Portfolios"]
    ch["Changes<br/>(short-lived)"] O["Outlines<br/>Solution Overviews,<br/>Options Assessments"] D["Designs<br/>Solution Designs,<br/>Preliminary Designs"]

    style C fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style S fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style V fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style L fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style O fill:#E8A838,color:#000
    style D fill:#E8A838,color:#000

The 24 Artifacts¶

The 24 specific artifacts are distributed across the six CSVLOD types, classified by usage frequency:

Type	Essential	Common	Uncommon
Considerations	Principles	Policies	Conceptual Data Models, Analytical Reports, Direction Statements
Standards	Technology Reference Models, Guidelines	Patterns, IT Principles	Logical Data Models
Visions	Business Capability Models, Roadmaps	Target States	Value Chains, Context Diagrams
Landscapes	Landscape Diagrams	Inventories, Enterprise System Portfolios, IT Roadmaps	—
Outlines	Solution Overviews	Options Assessments	Initiative Proposals
Designs	Solution Designs	—	Preliminary Solution Designs

Usage frequency is based on empirical observation: Essential artifacts are used by the majority of organizations, Common by 25-50%, and Uncommon by 10-25%.

The Three Core Processes¶

EA practices revolve around three distinct but interrelated processes:

graph LR
    SP["Strategic Planning<br/><i>Considerations + Visions</i>"]
    TO["Technology Optimization<br/><i>Standards + Landscapes</i>"]
    ID["Initiative Delivery<br/><i>Outlines + Designs</i>"]

    SP -->|"guides"| TO
    SP -->|"guides"| ID
    TO -->|"constrains"| ID

    style SP fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style TO fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style ID fill:#E8A838,color:#000

Process	Input Artifacts	Output Artifacts	Participants	Key Questions
Strategic Planning	Business strategy, existing Considerations	Considerations, Visions	Enterprise Architects, Business Leaders, IT Leaders	Where should we invest? What does the target state look like?
Technology Optimization	Considerations, Visions	Standards, Landscapes	Enterprise Architects, IT Leaders	What technologies do we have? Which are redundant? What should be standard?
Initiative Delivery	All of the above	Outlines, Designs	Solution Architects, Enterprise Architects	What is the best approach? How should the solution be designed?

Maturity Stages¶

EA on a Page describes four maturity stages based on empirical observation:

Stage	Name	Processes Established	Artifact Types Mastered
0	No Architecture	None	None
1	IT Optimization	Technology Optimization	Standards, Landscapes
2	Solution Delivery	+ Initiative Delivery	+ Outlines, Designs
3	Enterprise Architecture	+ Strategic Planning	+ Considerations, Visions

The maturity model is descriptive, not prescriptive — it describes what is typically observed, not what should be achieved in a linear progression.

Governance Model¶

EA on a Page describes governance arrangements at three levels:

Tier Model	Description	Typical Organization
One-Tier	Single EA team handles all activities	Small organizations, early maturity
Two-Tier	Enterprise architects (strategic) + Solution architects (project)	Most common model
Three-Tier	+ Domain/segment architects between enterprise and solution	Large, complex organizations

Phase 2 — The Linked.Archi Semantic Model¶

Namespace and Assets¶

File	Namespace	Content
`eaonapage-onto.ttl`	`https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#`	OWL ontology: 6 CSVLOD classes, inter-type relationships, processes, participants, governance, maturity
`eaonapage-tax.ttl`	`https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/tax#`	SKOS taxonomy: 6 CSVLOD types, 24 specific artifacts, 5 classification dimension facets (nature, focus, scope, lifecycle, frequency), maturity stages, governance classification
`eaonapage-viewpoints.ttl`	`https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/viewpoints#`	Viewpoints: 8 viewpoints across 4 categories
`eaonapage-shapes.ttl`	`https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/shapes#`	SHACL validation: artifact completeness and consistency
`eaonapage-deliverable-templates.ttl`	`https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/deliverable-templates#`	Deliverable templates: 8 common EA deliverables
`eaonapage-metamodel.ttl`	`https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/metamodel#`	Metamodel manifest (entry point)

Two-Layer Classification¶

EA on a Page uses two layers for classifying architecture work products:

OWL typing — the 6 CSVLOD types are OWL classes (eaop:Consideration, eaop:Standard, eaop:Vision, eaop:Landscape, eaop:Outline, eaop:Design). Instances are typed with one of these, enabling domain/range constraints on the inter-type relationship properties.
SKOS classification — the 24 specific artifact types (e.g., Principles, Technology Reference Models, Roadmaps, Solution Designs) are SKOS concepts in the taxonomy. Instances link to them via eaop:classifiedByType for finer-grained classification. Same design pattern as zach:classifiedByCell.

graph TD
    WP["ex:TechRefModel"]

    OWL["a eaop:Standard<br/>(OWL class — enables relationships)"]
    SKOS["eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:TechnologyReferenceModel<br/>(SKOS concept — finer classification)"]
    PR["eaop:usedInProcess eaop:TechnologyOptimization"]

    WP --> OWL
    WP --> SKOS
    WP --> PR

    style WP fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style OWL fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style SKOS fill:#E8A838,color:#000
    style PR fill:#95A5A6,color:#000

The SKOS taxonomy concept eaoptax:Standards links to the OWL class eaop:Standard via rdfs:seeAlso — they represent the same concept at different modeling levels.

OWL Classes¶

CSVLOD artifact types (for typing instances and constraining relationships):

Class	Nature	Focus	Role
`eaop:Consideration`	Rules	Business	Overarching governance imperatives
`eaop:Standard`	Rules	IT	Technical guidelines and reference models
`eaop:Vision`	Structures	Business	Future-state descriptions
`eaop:Landscape`	Structures	IT	Current-state descriptions
`eaop:Outline`	Changes	Business	Initiative-level architecture
`eaop:Design`	Changes	IT	Project-level specifications

Processes, participants, governance:

graph TD
    AP["ap:ArchitectureProcess"]
    EP["eaop:EAProcess"]
    SP["eaop:StrategicPlanning"]
    TO["eaop:TechnologyOptimization"]
    ID["eaop:InitiativeDelivery"]

    AP --> EP
    EP --> SP
    EP --> TO
    EP --> ID

    ST["arch:Stakeholder"]
    PA["eaop:EAParticipant"]
    EA["eaop:EnterpriseArchitect"]
    SA["eaop:SolutionArchitect"]

    ST --> PA
    PA --> EA
    PA --> SA

    GB["eaop:GovernanceBody"]
    MS["eaop:MaturityStage"]

    ST --> GB

    style EP fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style PA fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style GB fill:#E8A838,color:#000

Inter-Type Relationships¶

Kotusev identifies directional influence relationships between the six CSVLOD types — these describe how artifact types influence each other within an EA practice:

graph TD
    C["Consideration"]
    S["Standard"]
    V["Vision"]
    L["Landscape"]
    O["Outline"]
    D["Design"]

    C -->|"influenceCreation"| V
    C -->|"influenceSelection"| S
    C -->|"influenceEvolution"| L
    C -->|"influenceStructure"| O
    C -->|"influenceStructure"| D
    V -->|"initiateNew"| O
    V -->|"guideStructure"| D
    V -->|"guideEvolution"| L
    V -->|"guideSelection"| S
    O -->|"provideBasis"| D
    L -->|"provideEnvironment"| O
    L -->|"provideEnvironment"| D
    S -->|"provideGuidelines"| O
    S -->|"provideGuidelines"| D
    S -->|"eventuallyShape"| L

    style C fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style S fill:#4A90D9,color:#fff
    style V fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style L fill:#7BC67B,color:#000
    style O fill:#E8A838,color:#000
    style D fill:#E8A838,color:#000

These properties have explicit domain/range and can be used on individual artifacts.

Key Properties¶

Property	Domain	Range	Purpose
`eaop:classifiedByType`	—	ArtifactType	Links to specific artifact type (24 SKOS concepts)
`eaop:usedInProcess`	—	EAProcess	Which process the artifact supports
`eaop:influenceCreation`	Consideration	Vision	Considerations influence creation of Visions
`eaop:initiateNew`	Vision	Outline	Visions initiate new Outlines
`eaop:provideBasis`	Outline	Design	Outlines provide basis for Designs
`eaop:provideGuidelines`	Standard	Outline, Design	Standards guide Outlines and Designs
`eaop:provideEnvironment`	Landscape	Outline, Design	Landscapes provide environment
`eaop:eventuallyShape`	Standard	Landscape	Standards shape Landscapes
`eaop:governedBy`	—	GovernanceBody	Which body governs the artifact
`eaop:processParticipant`	EAProcess	EAParticipant	Who participates in the process
`eaop:hasPhase`	EAProcess	EAProcessPhase	Sub-phases of a process
`eaop:tierLevel`	ArchitectureTier	xsd:integer	Numeric tier level (1-3)

Viewpoint Catalog¶

The EA on a Page viewpoints are organized by the process they support:

Category	Viewpoint	Purpose	Key Artifact Types
Strategic	Business Capability VP	Deciding, Informing	Visions, Considerations
Strategic	Roadmap VP	Deciding, Informing	Visions, Landscapes
Optimization	Landscape VP	Informing, Deciding	Landscapes
Optimization	Standards Compliance VP	Governing, Deciding	Standards, Landscapes
Delivery	Solution Design VP	Designing	Designs
Delivery	Options Assessment VP	Deciding	Outlines, Considerations, Standards
Governance	Governance Overview VP	Governing, Informing	Governance Bodies, Tiers
Governance	Maturity Assessment VP	Governing, Deciding	Maturity Stages, Processes

Deliverable Templates¶

Template	Process	Viewpoints Required	Sections
Architecture Strategy	Strategic Planning	Business Capability, Roadmap	4
Technology Strategy	Technology Optimization	Standards Compliance, Landscape	4
Technology Reference Model	Technology Optimization	Standards Compliance	3
Solution Brief	Initiative Delivery (Initiation)	Options Assessment	3
Solution Overview	Initiative Delivery (Initiation)	Options Assessment, Standards Compliance	5
Solution Design	Initiative Delivery (Realization)	Solution Design, Standards Compliance	6
Architecture Principles Document	Governance	Business Capability	3
Roadmap	Strategic Planning	Roadmap, Landscape	4

Phase 3 — Practical Modeling¶

Example 1: Classifying an artifact¶

@prefix eaop:    <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#> .
@prefix eaoptax: <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/tax#> .
@prefix skos:    <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix ex:      <https://model.example.com/myea#> .

# OWL type gives the CSVLOD category; classifiedByType gives the specific artifact type
ex:TechRefModel a eaop:Standard ;
    skos:prefLabel "Enterprise Technology Reference Model"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:TechnologyReferenceModel ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:TechnologyOptimization .

Example 2: Modeling a complete artifact portfolio¶

@prefix eaop:    <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#> .
@prefix eaoptax: <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/tax#> .
@prefix skos:    <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix ex:      <https://model.example.com/myea#> .

# Considerations
ex:ArchPrinciples a eaop:Consideration ;
    skos:prefLabel "Architecture Principles"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:Principle ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:StrategicPlanning .

# Visions
ex:CapabilityMap a eaop:Vision ;
    skos:prefLabel "Enterprise Capability Map"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:BusinessCapabilityModel ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:StrategicPlanning .

# Standards
ex:TechRefModel a eaop:Standard ;
    skos:prefLabel "Technology Reference Model"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:TechnologyReferenceModel ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:TechnologyOptimization .

# Landscapes
ex:AppLandscape a eaop:Landscape ;
    skos:prefLabel "Application Landscape"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:LandscapeDiagram ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:TechnologyOptimization .

# Outlines
ex:PaymentSolutionOverview a eaop:Outline ;
    skos:prefLabel "Payment Platform Solution Overview"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:SolutionOverview ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:InitiativeDelivery .

# Designs
ex:PaymentServiceDesign a eaop:Design ;
    skos:prefLabel "Payment Service Detailed Design"@en ;
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:SolutionDesign ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:InitiativeDelivery .

# Inter-type relationships between artifacts
ex:ArchPrinciples eaop:influenceCreation ex:CapabilityMap .
ex:ArchPrinciples eaop:influenceSelection ex:TechRefModel .
ex:CapabilityMap eaop:initiateNew ex:PaymentSolutionOverview .
ex:TechRefModel eaop:provideGuidelinesForDesign ex:PaymentServiceDesign .
ex:AppLandscape eaop:provideEnvironmentForOutline ex:PaymentSolutionOverview .
ex:PaymentSolutionOverview eaop:provideBasis ex:PaymentServiceDesign .

Example 3: Modeling governance arrangements¶

@prefix eaop: <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#> .
@prefix arch: <https://meta.linked.archi/core#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix ex:   <https://model.example.com/myea#> .

# Two-tier governance arrangement
ex:OurGovernance a eaop:GovernanceArrangement ;
    skos:prefLabel "Two-Tier Architecture Governance"@en ;
    skos:definition "Enterprise architects handle strategic artifacts; solution architects handle project artifacts."@en .

# Governance bodies
ex:ARB a eaop:GovernanceBody ;
    skos:prefLabel "Architecture Review Board"@en ;
    eaop:governsTier ex:SolutionTier ;
    skos:definition "Reviews and approves Solution Overviews and Solution Designs."@en .

ex:SteeringCommittee a eaop:GovernanceBody ;
    skos:prefLabel "IT Steering Committee"@en ;
    eaop:governsTier ex:EnterpriseTier ;
    skos:definition "Approves strategic direction, principles, and major investments."@en .

ex:ARB eaop:escalatesTo ex:SteeringCommittee .

# Architecture tiers
ex:EnterpriseTier a eaop:ArchitectureTier ;
    skos:prefLabel "Enterprise Tier"@en ;
    eaop:tierLevel 1 .

ex:SolutionTier a eaop:ArchitectureTier ;
    skos:prefLabel "Solution Tier"@en ;
    eaop:tierLevel 2 .

# Link artifacts to governance
ex:PaymentSolutionOverview eaop:governedBy ex:ARB .
ex:ArchPrinciples eaop:governedBy ex:SteeringCommittee .

Example 4: Dual classification with Zachman¶

@prefix eaop:    <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#> .
@prefix eaoptax: <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/tax#> .
@prefix zach:    <https://meta.linked.archi/zachman/onto#> .
@prefix zachtax: <https://meta.linked.archi/zachman/tax#> .
@prefix arch:    <https://meta.linked.archi/core#> .
@prefix skos:    <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix ex:      <https://model.example.com/myea#> .

# A technology reference model — classified by both frameworks
ex:TechRefModel a arch:Model ;
    skos:prefLabel "Enterprise Technology Reference Model"@en ;
    # EA on a Page classification
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:TechnologyReferenceModel ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:TechnologyOptimization ;
    # Zachman classification
    zach:classifiedByCell zachtax:R3C2_ProcessRepresentation ,
                          zachtax:R3C1_InventoryRepresentation .

# A business capability model — classified by both frameworks
ex:CapabilityMap a arch:Model ;
    skos:prefLabel "Enterprise Capability Map"@en ;
    # EA on a Page classification
    eaop:classifiedByType eaoptax:BusinessCapabilityModel ;
    eaop:usedInProcess eaop:StrategicPlanning ;
    # Zachman classification
    zach:classifiedByCell zachtax:R2C1_InventoryDefinition .

Example 5: Querying the artifact portfolio¶

PREFIX eaop:    <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#>
PREFIX eaoptax: <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/tax#>
PREFIX skos:    <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>

# Artifact portfolio by CSVLOD type
SELECT ?type ?typeLabel ?artifact ?label WHERE {
    ?type skos:broader ?group .
    ?group skos:broader eaoptax:ArtifactTypes .
    ?type skos:prefLabel ?typeLabel .
    ?artifact eaop:classifiedByType ?type ;
              skos:prefLabel ?label .
}
ORDER BY ?typeLabel ?label

Example 6: Maturity assessment query¶

PREFIX eaop:    <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#>
PREFIX eaoptax: <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/tax#>
PREFIX skos:    <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>

# Which CSVLOD groups do we have artifacts for? (indicates maturity stage)
SELECT ?group ?groupLabel (COUNT(?artifact) AS ?count) WHERE {
    ?group skos:broader eaoptax:ArtifactTypes ;
           skos:prefLabel ?groupLabel .
    OPTIONAL {
        ?type skos:broader ?group .
        ?artifact eaop:classifiedByType ?type .
    }
}
GROUP BY ?group ?groupLabel
ORDER BY ?count

Example 7: Process coverage analysis¶

PREFIX eaop:    <https://meta.linked.archi/eaonapage/onto#>
PREFIX rdfs:    <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
PREFIX skos:    <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>

# Which processes have artifacts? Which are missing?
SELECT ?process ?processLabel (COUNT(?artifact) AS ?artifactCount) WHERE {
    ?process rdfs:subClassOf eaop:EAProcess ;
             skos:prefLabel ?processLabel .
    OPTIONAL {
        ?artifact eaop:usedInProcess ?process .
    }
}
GROUP BY ?process ?processLabel
ORDER BY ?artifactCount

SHACL Validation¶

The eaonapage-shapes.ttl file provides validation rules:

Completeness: Every artifact must have artifactScope, artifactLifecycle, artifactNature, and artifactFocus
Consistency: Scope/lifecycle/nature/focus values must match the CSVLOD type
Process linkage: Every artifact should be linked to a process via usedInProcess

Run validation:

.scripts/validate.sh --shacl eaonapage

Appendix A — Key Differences from Other Frameworks¶

Dimension	EA on a Page	TOGAF	Zachman
Origin	Empirical (27+ orgs)	Prescriptive (industry consortium)	Theoretical (classification)
Nature	Descriptive — what EA practices do	Prescriptive — what EA practices should do	Classificatory — what could be described
Process	3 processes (Strategic Planning, Technology Optimization, Initiative Delivery)	ADM (8 phases + requirements management)	None (not a methodology)
Artifacts	24 artifacts in 6 types	50+ artifacts across phases	36 cells (classification slots)
Governance	Empirical governance model (tiers, bodies)	Architecture Board, compliance reviews	None
Maturity	4 stages (descriptive)	Architecture Maturity Model (prescriptive)	None

Appendix B — Mapping CSVLOD to Common Deliverables¶

CSVLOD Type	Typical Deliverables	Lifecycle	Audience
Considerations	Architecture Principles Document, Governance Charter	Permanent	Business + IT Leaders
Standards	Technology Reference Model, Pattern Catalog, Security Standards	Permanent	Enterprise + Solution Architects
Visions	Architecture Strategy, Capability Map, IT Roadmap	Long-lived (updated annually)	Business + IT Leaders
Landscapes	Application Portfolio, Integration Map, Technology Inventory	Long-lived (continuously maintained)	Enterprise Architects, IT Leaders
Outlines	Solution Overview, Options Assessment, Architecture Brief	Short-lived (initiative duration)	Solution Architects, Business Sponsors
Designs	Solution Design, Interface Contract, Deployment Architecture	Short-lived (project duration)	Solution Architects, Delivery Teams

Appendix C — Comparison Articles¶

For detailed comparisons of EA on a Page with other frameworks in Linked.Archi:

Zachman Framework vs EA on a Page — Two classification lenses on the same artifacts
EA Frameworks Compared — Broader comparison across TOGAF, Zachman, EA on a Page, and others
Zachman Primer & Modeling Guide — The companion framework primer
TOGAF Primer & Modeling Guide — TOGAF framework primer

References¶

Kotusev, S. (2021). The Practice of Enterprise Architecture: A Modern Approach to Business and IT Alignment. 2nd ed. SK Publishing. ISBN 978-0-6450825-2-4.
Kotusev, S. (2024). Enterprise Architects: The Agents of Digital Transformation. SK Publishing. ISBN 978-1-7636486-3-7.
Kotusev, S. (2016). The CSVLOD Model of Enterprise Architecture. BCS.
Kotusev, S. (2019). Enterprise architecture and enterprise architecture artifacts. Journal of Information Technology, 34(2), 102-128.
Kotusev, S. (2019). Yet Another Taxonomy for Enterprise Architecture Artifacts. Journal of Enterprise Architecture.
EA on a Page
Kotusev.com
BCS — Enterprise Architecture on a Single Page
BCS — Enterprise Architecture Practice on a Single Page
Linked.Archi EA on a Page Metamodel
Linked.Archi Frameworks Guide

Disclaimer: This is a community semantic representation of the EA on a Page framework for interoperability purposes. It is not produced by, endorsed by, or affiliated with Svyatoslav Kotusev or IASA. The framework is based on peer-reviewed empirical research published by Kotusev across multiple academic and practitioner venues.