Damn homophones ;)

README.md

@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ Architectural documentation is sometimes more and sometimes less important. Impo
 * **Clean Code**: Code is the best documentation if done right. A good architect should be capable to distinguish between good and bad code. A really great resource to learn more about good and bad code is the book “Clean Code” by Robert C. Martin.
 * **Generate documentation where possible**: Systems are changing quickly and it is hard to update the documentation. Whether it is about APIs or system landscapes in form of CMDBs (Configuration management database): The underlying information often changes too fast to keep the corresponding documentation up to date by hand. Example: For APIs you could auto generate documentation based on the definition file if you are model driven, or directly from the source code. A lot of tools exist for that, I think Swagger and RAML are a good starting point to learn more.
 * **As much as necessary, as little as possible**: Whatever you need to document, e.g., decision papers, try to focus on only one thing at a time and include only the necessary information for this one thing. Extensive documentation is hard to read and to understand. Additional information should be stored in the appendix. Especially for decision papers it is more important to tell a convincing story instead of just throwing tons of arguments. Further, this saves you and your co-workers, who have to read it, a lot of time. Have a look at some documentation you have done in the past (source code, models, decision papers, etc.) and ask yourself the following questions: “Are all necessary information included to understand it?”, “Which information are really required and which could be omitted?” and “Does the documentation has a red line?”.
-* **Learn more about architecture frameworks**: This point could be applied to all other “technical” points as well. I put it here, as frameworks like TOGAF or Zachmann are providing “tools” which feel heavy on the documentation site, although their added value is not limited to documentation. Getting certified in such a framework teaches you to tackle architecture more systematically.
+* **Learn more about architecture frameworks**: This point could be applied to all other “technical” points as well. I put it here, as frameworks like TOGAF or Zachmann are providing “tools” which feel heavy on the documentation side, although their added value is not limited to documentation. Getting certified in such a framework teaches you to tackle architecture more systematically.
 
 ## (6) Communicate
 From my observations this is one of the most underestimated skill. If you are brilliant in design but cannot communicate your ideas, your thoughts are likely to have less impact or even fail to succeed.
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ From my observations this is one of the most underestimated skill. If you are br
 
 ## (7) Estimate and Evaluate
 * **Know basic project management principles**: As architect or lead developer you are often asked for estimates to realize your ideas: How long, how much, how many people, which skills, etc.? Of course, if you plan to introduce new tools or frameworks you need to have an answer for these kind of “management” questions. Initially, you should be able to give a rough estimate, like days, months or years. And do not forget that it is not only about implementing, there are more activities to consider, like requirements engineering, testing and fixing bugs. Therefore, you should know the activities the used software development process. One thing you can apply to get better estimates, is to use past data and derive your prediction from that. If you do not have past data, you can also try approaches such as COCOMO by Barry W. Boehm. If you are deployed in an agile project, learn how to estimate and to plan properly: The book “Agile Estimating and Planning” by Mike Cohn provides a solid overview in this area.
-* **Evaluate “unknown” architecture**: As architect you should also be able to evaluate the suitability of architectures for the current or future context(s). This is not an easy task but you can prepare for it by having a set of questions at hand which are common for every architecture. And it’s not only about architecture but also about how the system is managed, as this also gives you insides about the quality. I suggest to always have some questions prepared and ready to use. Some ideas for general questions:
+* **Evaluate “unknown” architecture**: As architect you should also be able to evaluate the suitability of architectures for the current or future context(s). This is not an easy task but you can prepare for it by having a set of questions at hand which are common for every architecture. And it’s not only about architecture but also about how the system is managed, as this also gives you insights about the quality. I suggest to always have some questions prepared and ready to use. Some ideas for general questions:
   1. Design practices: Which patterns does the architecture follow? Are they consequently and correctly used? Does the design follow a red line or is there an uncontrolled growth? Is there a clear structure and separation of concerns?
   2. Development practices: Code guidelines in place and followed? How is the code versioned? Deployment practices?
   3. Quality assurance: Test automation coverage? Static code analysis in place and good results? Peer reviews in place?