> I dunno, I kind of subscribe to software architecture being like, a set of design decisions that guide the implementation. I think this is the one mandatory

> I dunno, I kind of subscribe to software architecture being like, a set of design decisions that guide the implementation. I think this is the one mandatory part of software architecture which is giving developers information to help them make their own design decisions without constantly deferring to the authority. But the exact place where architecture ends and development starts varies a lot. I like to think that architecture itself decides what is important from the architecture standpoint. If architecture decides a certain low level application detail is important, then it becomes an architecture detail. In fact, in most organisation architecture controls at the very least some top level design like components, communication patterns, APIs and technology in use. In some organisation architecture goes as far as individual classes. Not all classes, but maybe classes modelling the domain of the problem especially, if that model is used as a language for multiple project or even implemented as a shared artifact. I think C4 is suitable for those organisations where architecture is concerned with more low level structure than just listing applications and their integration interfaces.