Seen c4model.com/ by @simonbrown ?

Thanks! Yes, the C4 model is inspired by 4+1, but combines the logical and development views (with multiple levels of abstraction), reducing the "model-code gap", and making it more developer-friendly.

For most software systems (including cloud native), a good minimum starting point is: - System Context view - Container view - Deployment view (a simplified UML deployment inspired diagram, showing the mapping of C4 model "containers" to deployment nodes)

Usually start with the System Context view. For so long now, can't even recall exactly when - maybe mid-1980's via Jackson, Yourdon or de Marco. All first rate software engineering gurus. (Not forgetting @Grady_Booch of course).

It’s interesting you mention this - last night I was trying to think how DDD maps to C4. I generally prefer starting with the the domain and really understanding the problem space.

The thing to note about the C4 model is that it's just a diagramming technique, and from that perspective it complements DDD (and other analysis/design/exploration techniques too).

The same is true of UML ... it's a diagramming/communication tool rather than a software design process. Unfortunately, UML became tightly coupled with "big design up front" and was thrown away by many teams in their haste to become "agile".

I believe some of the criticism is valid. TBH I’d take a video recording of a walk through of a messy hand written diagram over a detailed and technically correct UML diagram in many contexts (for eg where speed of iteration matters). I also never bought into the MDA approach.

Agreed; some of the criticism levelled at UML is justified, and I don't buy into MDA either. Much of the criticism is just folklore though, and a misunderstanding that UML == "big design up front".

MDA is what ruined the UML.