architecture-domain-analysis

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Subdomain Identification & Bounded Context Analysis

子域识别与限界上下文分析

This skill analyzes codebases to identify subdomains (Core, Supporting, Generic) and suggest bounded contexts following Domain-Driven Design Strategic Design principles.

本技能遵循Domain-Driven Design（DDD）战略设计原则，分析代码库以识别子域（Core、Supporting、Generic）并提出Bounded Context建议。

When to Use

适用场景

Apply this skill when:

Analyzing domain boundaries in any codebase
Identifying Core, Supporting, and Generic subdomains
Mapping bounded contexts from problem space to solution space
Assessing domain cohesion and detecting coupling issues
Planning domain-driven refactoring
Understanding business capabilities in code

在以下场景中应用本技能：

分析任意代码库中的领域边界
识别Core Domain、Supporting Subdomain和Generic Subdomain
将Bounded Context从问题空间映射到解决方案空间
评估领域内聚性并检测耦合问题
规划领域驱动的重构
理解代码中的业务能力

Core Principles

核心原则

Subdomain Classification

子域分类

Core Domain: Competitive advantage, highest business value, requires best developers

Indicators: Complex business logic, frequent changes, domain experts needed

Supporting Subdomain: Essential but not differentiating, business-specific

Indicators: Supports Core Domain, moderate complexity, business-specific rules

Generic Subdomain: Common functionality, could be outsourced

Indicators: Well-understood problem, low differentiation, standard functionality

Core Domain：具备竞争优势，业务价值最高，需要最优秀的开发人员

识别指标：复杂的业务逻辑、频繁变更、需要领域专家参与

Supporting Subdomain：必不可少但不具备差异化，具有业务特定性

识别指标：支撑Core Domain、中等复杂度、包含业务特定规则

Generic Subdomain：通用功能，可外包实现

识别指标：问题已被充分理解、差异化低、标准化功能

Bounded Context

An explicit linguistic boundary where domain terms have specific, unambiguous meanings.

Primary nature: Linguistic boundary, not technical
Key rule: Inside boundary, all Ubiquitous Language terms are unambiguous
Goal: Align 1 subdomain to 1 bounded context (ideal)

一个明确的语言边界，在该边界内领域术语具有特定、无歧义的含义。

本质：语言边界，而非技术边界
核心规则：边界内部，所有Ubiquitous Language术语均无歧义
目标：理想状态下，1个子域对应1个Bounded Context

Analysis Process

分析流程

Phase 1: Extract Concepts

阶段1：提取概念

Scan codebase for business concepts (not infrastructure):

Entities (domain models with identity)
- Patterns:
```
@Entity
```
  ,
```
class
```
  , domain models
- Focus: Business concepts, not technical classes
Services (business operations)
- Patterns:
```
*Service
```
  ,
```
*Manager
```
  ,
```
*Handler
```
- Focus: Business logic, not technical utilities
Use Cases (business workflows)
- Patterns:
```
*UseCase
```
  ,
```
*Command
```
  ,
```
*Handler
```
- Focus: Business processes, not CRUD
Controllers/Resolvers (entry points)
- Patterns:
```
*Controller
```
  ,
```
*Resolver
```
  , API endpoints
- Focus: Business capabilities, not technical routes

扫描代码库中的业务概念（非基础设施相关）：

Entities（具有唯一标识的领域模型）
- 模式：
```
@Entity
```
  、
```
class
```
  、领域模型类
- 重点：业务概念，而非技术类
Services（业务操作）
- 模式：
```
*Service
```
  、
```
*Manager
```
  、
```
*Handler
```
- 重点：业务逻辑，而非技术工具类
Use Cases（业务流程）
- 模式：
```
*UseCase
```
  、
```
*Command
```
  、
```
*Handler
```
- 重点：业务流程，而非CRUD操作
Controllers/Resolvers（入口点）
- 模式：
```
*Controller
```
  、
```
*Resolver
```
  、API端点
- 重点：业务能力，而非技术路由

Phase 2: Group by Ubiquitous Language

阶段2：按Ubiquitous Language分组

For each concept, determine:

Primary Language Context

What business vocabulary does this belong to?
Examples:
- ```
Subscription
```
  ,
```
Invoice
```
  ,
```
Payment
```
  → Billing language
- ```
Movie
```
  ,
```
Video
```
  ,
```
Episode
```
  → Content language
- ```
User
```
  ,
```
Authentication
```
  → Identity language

Linguistic Boundaries

Where do term meanings change?
Same term, different meaning = different bounded context
Example: "Customer" in Sales vs "Customer" in Support

Concept Relationships

Which concepts naturally belong together?
Which share business vocabulary?
Which reference each other?

针对每个概念，确定：

主要语言上下文

该概念属于哪个业务词汇体系？
示例：
- ```
Subscription
```
  、
```
Invoice
```
  、
```
Payment
```
  → 计费领域词汇
- ```
Movie
```
  、
```
Video
```
  、
```
Episode
```
  → 内容领域词汇
- ```
User
```
  、
```
Authentication
```
  → 身份领域词汇

语言边界

术语含义在何处发生变化？
同一术语、不同含义 = 不同Bounded Context
示例：销售领域的"Customer"与售后领域的"Customer"

概念关联

哪些概念自然属于同一组？
哪些共享相同的业务词汇？
哪些存在相互引用？

Phase 3: Identify Subdomains

阶段3：识别子域

A subdomain has:

Distinct business capability
Independent business value
Unique vocabulary
Multiple related entities working together
Cohesive set of business operations

Common Domain Patterns:

Billing/Subscription: Payments, invoices, plans
Content/Catalog: Media, products, inventory
Identity/Access: Users, authentication, authorization
Analytics: Metrics, dashboards, insights
Notifications: Messages, alerts, communications

Classify Each Subdomain:

Use this decision tree:

Is it a competitive advantage?
  YES → Core Domain
  NO → Does it require business-specific knowledge?
        YES → Supporting Subdomain
        NO → Generic Subdomain

子域具备以下特征：

独特的业务能力
独立的业务价值
专属词汇体系
多个相关实体协同工作
内聚的业务操作集合

常见领域模式：

计费/订阅：支付、发票、套餐
内容/目录：媒体、产品、库存
身份/权限：用户、认证、授权
分析：指标、仪表盘、洞察
通知：消息、告警、通讯

子域分类：

使用如下决策树：

Is it a competitive advantage?
  YES → Core Domain
  NO → Does it require business-specific knowledge?
        YES → Supporting Subdomain
        NO → Generic Subdomain

Phase 4: Assess Cohesion

阶段4：评估内聚性

High Cohesion Indicators ✅

Concepts share Ubiquitous Language
Concepts frequently used together
Direct business relationships
Changes to one affect others in group
Solve same business problem

Low Cohesion Indicators ❌

Different business vocabularies mixed
Concepts rarely used together
No direct business relationship
Changes don't affect others
Solve different business problems

Cohesion Score Formula:

Score = (
  Linguistic Cohesion (0-3) +    // Shared vocabulary
  Usage Cohesion (0-3) +         // Used together
  Data Cohesion (0-2) +          // Entity relationships
  Change Cohesion (0-2)          // Change together
) / 10

8-10: High Cohesion ✅
5-7:  Medium Cohesion ⚠️
0-4:  Low Cohesion ❌

高内聚性指标 ✅

概念共享Ubiquitous Language
概念频繁协同使用
存在直接业务关联
某一概念的变更会影响组内其他概念
解决同一业务问题

低内聚性指标 ❌

混合不同业务词汇体系
概念极少协同使用
无直接业务关联
某一概念的变更不影响组内其他概念
解决不同业务问题

内聚性评分公式：

Score = (
  Linguistic Cohesion (0-3) +    // Shared vocabulary
  Usage Cohesion (0-3) +         // Used together
  Data Cohesion (0-2) +          // Entity relationships
  Change Cohesion (0-2)          // Change together
) / 10

8-10: High Cohesion ✅
5-7:  Medium Cohesion ⚠️
0-4:  Low Cohesion ❌

Phase 5: Detect Low Cohesion Issues

阶段5：检测低内聚性问题

Rule 1: Linguistic Mismatch

Problem: Different business vocabularies mixed
Example:
```
User
```
(identity) +
```
Subscription
```
(billing) in same service
Action: Suggest separation into different bounded contexts

Rule 2: Cross-Domain Dependencies

Problem: Tight coupling between domains
Example: Service A directly instantiates entities from Domain B
Action: Suggest interface-based integration

Rule 3: Mixed Responsibilities

Problem: Single class handles multiple business concerns
Example: Service handling both billing and content
Action: Suggest splitting by subdomain

Rule 4: Generic in Core

Problem: Generic functionality in core business logic
Example: Email sending in billing service
Action: Extract to Generic Subdomain

Rule 5: Unclear Boundaries

Problem: Cannot determine which domain concept belongs to
Example: Entity with relationships to multiple domains
Action: Clarify boundaries, possibly split concept

规则1：语言不匹配

问题：混合不同业务词汇体系
示例：同一服务中包含
```
User
```
（身份领域）和
```
Subscription
```
（计费领域）
行动：建议拆分到不同Bounded Context

规则2：跨域依赖

问题：领域间存在强耦合
示例：服务A直接实例化领域B的实体
行动：建议基于接口的集成方式

规则3：职责混合

问题：单个类处理多个业务关注点
示例：同时处理计费和内容逻辑的服务
行动：建议按子域拆分

规则4：核心域中包含通用功能

问题：核心业务逻辑中包含通用功能
示例：计费服务中包含邮件发送逻辑
行动：提取到Generic Subdomain

规则5：边界模糊

问题：无法确定概念所属领域
示例：与多个领域存在关联的实体
行动：明确边界，可能需要拆分概念

Phase 6: Map Bounded Contexts

阶段6：映射Bounded Context

For each subdomain identified, suggest bounded context:

Bounded Context Characteristics:

Name reflects Ubiquitous Language
Contains complete domain model
Has explicit integration points
Clear linguistic boundary

Integration Patterns:

Shared Kernel: Shared model between contexts (use sparingly)
Customer/Supplier: Downstream depends on upstream
Conformist: Downstream conforms to upstream
Anti-corruption Layer: Translation layer between contexts
Open Host Service: Published interface for integration
Published Language: Well-documented integration protocol

针对每个识别出的子域，提出Bounded Context建议：

Bounded Context特征：

名称反映Ubiquitous Language
包含完整领域模型
具有明确的集成点
清晰的语言边界

集成模式：

Shared Kernel：上下文间共享模型（谨慎使用）
Customer/Supplier：下游依赖上游
Conformist：下游遵循上游规范
Anti-corruption Layer：上下文间的转换层
Open Host Service：对外发布的集成接口
Published Language：文档完善的集成协议

Output Format

输出格式

Domain Map

领域映射

For each domain/subdomain:

markdown

undefined

针对每个领域/子域：

markdown

undefined

Domain: {Name}

Type: Core Domain | Supporting Subdomain | Generic Subdomain

Ubiquitous Language: {key business terms}

Business Capability: {what business problem it solves}

Key Concepts:

{Concept} (Entity|Service|UseCase) - {brief description}

Subdomains (if applicable):

{Subdomain} (Core|Supporting|Generic)
- Concepts: {list}
- Cohesion: {score}/10
- Dependencies: → {other domains}

Suggested Bounded Context: {Name}Context

Linguistic boundary: {where terms have specific meaning}
Integration: {how it should integrate with other contexts}

Dependencies:

→ {OtherDomain} via {interface/API}
← {OtherDomain} via {interface/API}

Cohesion Score: {score}/10

undefined

Type: Core Domain | Supporting Subdomain | Generic Subdomain

Ubiquitous Language: {key business terms}

Business Capability: {what business problem it solves}

Key Concepts:

{Concept} (Entity|Service|UseCase) - {brief description}

Subdomains (if applicable):

{Subdomain} (Core|Supporting|Generic)
- Concepts: {list}
- Cohesion: {score}/10
- Dependencies: → {other domains}

Suggested Bounded Context: {Name}Context

Linguistic boundary: {where terms have specific meaning}
Integration: {how it should integrate with other contexts}

Dependencies:

→ {OtherDomain} via {interface/API}
← {OtherDomain} via {interface/API}

Cohesion Score: {score}/10

undefined

Cohesion Matrix

内聚性矩阵

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Cross-Domain Cohesion

Domain A	Domain B	Cohesion	Issue	Recommendation
Billing	Identity	2/10	❌ Direct coupling	Use interface
Content	Billing	6/10	⚠️ Usage tracking	Event-based integration

undefined

Domain A	Domain B	Cohesion	Issue	Recommendation
Billing	Identity	2/10	❌ Direct coupling	Use interface
Content	Billing	6/10	⚠️ Usage tracking	Event-based integration

undefined

Low Cohesion Report

低内聚性报告

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Issues Detected

Priority: High

Issue: {description}

Location: {file/class/method}
Problem: {what's wrong}
Concepts: {involved concepts}
Cohesion: {score}/10
Recommendation: {suggested fix}

Issue: {description}

Location: {file/class/method}
Problem: {what's wrong}
Concepts: {involved concepts}
Cohesion: {score}/10
Recommendation: {suggested fix}

Priority: Medium

{similar format}

undefined

{similar format}

undefined

Bounded Context Map

Bounded Context映射

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Suggested Bounded Contexts

{ContextName}Context

Contains Subdomains:

{Subdomain1} (Core)
{Subdomain2} (Supporting)

Ubiquitous Language:

Term: Definition in this context

Integration Requirements:

Consumes from: {OtherContext} via {pattern}
Publishes to: {OtherContext} via {pattern}

Implementation Notes:

Separate persistence
Independent deployment
Explicit API boundaries

undefined

Contains Subdomains:

{Subdomain1} (Core)
{Subdomain2} (Supporting)

Ubiquitous Language:

Term: Definition in this context

Integration Requirements:

Consumes from: {OtherContext} via {pattern}
Publishes to: {OtherContext} via {pattern}

Implementation Notes:

Separate persistence
Independent deployment
Explicit API boundaries

undefined

Best Practices

最佳实践

Do's ✅

建议✅

Focus on business language, not code structure
Let Ubiquitous Language guide boundaries
Measure cohesion objectively
Identify clear integration points
Classify every subdomain (Core/Supporting/Generic)
Look for linguistic boundaries first

聚焦业务语言，而非代码结构
以Ubiquitous Language为指导划分边界
客观衡量内聚性
明确集成点
为每个子域分类（Core/Supporting/Generic）
优先识别语言边界

Don'ts ❌

禁忌❌

Don't group by technical layers
Don't force single global model
Don't ignore linguistic differences
Don't couple domains directly
Don't create contexts by architecture
Don't eliminate all dependencies (some are necessary)

不要按技术层分组
不要强制使用单一全局模型
不要忽略语言差异
不要直接耦合领域
不要按架构划分上下文
不要消除所有依赖（部分依赖是必要的）

Analysis Checklist

分析检查清单

Quick Reference

快速参考

Subdomain Decision Tree

子域决策树

Analyze business capability
└─ Is it competitive advantage?
   ├─ YES → Core Domain
   └─ NO → Is it business-specific?
      ├─ YES → Supporting Subdomain
      └─ NO → Generic Subdomain

Analyze business capability
└─ Is it competitive advantage?
   ├─ YES → Core Domain
   └─ NO → Is it business-specific?
      ├─ YES → Supporting Subdomain
      └─ NO → Generic Subdomain

Cohesion Quick Check

内聚性快速检查

Same vocabulary? → High linguistic cohesion
Used together? → High usage cohesion
Direct relationships? → High data cohesion
Change together? → High change cohesion

All high → Strong subdomain candidate
Mix of high/low → Review boundaries
All low → Likely wrong grouping

Same vocabulary? → High linguistic cohesion
Used together? → High usage cohesion
Direct relationships? → High data cohesion
Change together? → High change cohesion

All high → Strong subdomain candidate
Mix of high/low → Review boundaries
All low → Likely wrong grouping

Bounded Context Signals

Bounded Context信号

Clear boundary signs:
✅ Distinct Ubiquitous Language
✅ Concepts have unambiguous meaning
✅ Different meanings across contexts
✅ Clear integration points

Unclear boundary signs:
❌ Same terms with same meanings everywhere
❌ Concepts used identically across system
❌ No clear linguistic differences
❌ Tight coupling everywhere

Clear boundary signs:
✅ Distinct Ubiquitous Language
✅ Concepts have unambiguous meaning
✅ Different meanings across contexts
✅ Clear integration points

Unclear boundary signs:
❌ Same terms with same meanings everywhere
❌ Concepts used identically across system
❌ No clear linguistic differences
❌ Tight coupling everywhere

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

需避免的反模式

Big Ball of Mud

Everything connected to everything
No clear boundaries
Mixed vocabularies
Prevention: Explicit bounded contexts

All-Inclusive Model

Single model for entire business
Impossible global definitions
Creates conflicts
Prevention: Embrace multiple contexts

Mixed Linguistic Concepts

Different vocabularies in same context
Example: User/Permission with Forum/Post
Prevention: Keep linguistic associations

Big Ball of Mud

所有组件相互关联
无清晰边界
混合多种词汇体系
预防方式：明确Bounded Context

All-Inclusive Model

单一模型覆盖全部业务
无法实现全局统一定义
引发冲突
预防方式：采用多上下文模式

Mixed Linguistic Concepts

同一上下文中混合不同词汇体系
示例：User/Permission与Forum/Post共存
预防方式：保持语言关联一致性

Notes

注意事项

This is strategic analysis, not tactical implementation
Focus on WHAT domains exist, not HOW to implement
Some cross-domain dependencies are normal
Low cohesion doesn't always mean "bad," it means "needs attention"
Generic Subdomains naturally have lower cohesion
Always validate with domain experts when possible

这是战略层面的分析，而非战术层面的实现
聚焦于“存在哪些领域”，而非“如何实现”
部分跨域依赖是正常的
低内聚性不总是意味着“错误”，而是“需要关注”
Generic Subdomain的内聚性自然较低
尽可能与领域专家验证分析结果

Validation Criteria

验证标准

Good domain identification has:

✅ Clear boundaries with distinct Ubiquitous Language
✅ High internal cohesion within domains
✅ Explicit cross-domain dependencies
✅ Business alignment with capabilities
✅ Actionable recommendations for issues

优秀的领域识别应具备：

✅ 边界清晰，具有独特的Ubiquitous Language
✅ 领域内部内聚性高
✅ 跨域依赖明确
✅ 与业务能力对齐
✅ 针对问题的可落地建议