When can an enterprise architecture framework be used to document a solution architecture?

Question

While documenting solution architectures I use frameworks such as the following to provide structure for the Architecture Description document (see below):

• Viewpoints and Perspectives
• 4+1 View

However, I've also seen people use Enterprise Architecture concepts to structure their Architecture Descriptions, using document headings such as TOGAF's:

• Business Architecture
• Functional Architecture
• Data Architecture
• Application Architecture
• Etc.,

Question: Are Enterprise Architecture frameworks suitable for documenting Solution Architectures?

---

Definition:

Architecture Description (AD): A collection of products to document an architecture (source: Wikipedia).

Answer 1

The OpenGroup have created ArchiMate as a tool for architecture modeling. It's designed to be in line with TOGAF, so a description of a solution architecture using ArchiMate would be full of those TOGAF terms.

Answer 2

The term "Enterprise Architecture Framework" (EAF) is a very broad term. This answer contains a link to an helpful orientation (including some historical overview) how differently the term is used.

If you choose the right definition - and perhaps use only a subset of a given EAF - then the answer is: "Yes, they are suitable!" But since some EAFs might focus on something totally different (e.g. the process how you got to your architecture and not on the documentation of the architecture) the answer might also be: "They are not."

For your purpose (structuring architecture artifacts) the taxonomy provided by Zachmann might be a good fit. But I would argue that your current way of structuring it fits well into some of the other EAFs that doesn't define how the architectural artifacts are to be structured.