[ewi_]

I believe that the way we represent information is key to understanding. Data points in a list are usually way less insightful than a good graph (emphasis on good). What I have found is that it's the case in describing system architecture as well.

As you say, you can describe a system in a few paragraphs, explaining the relationship between the main components. However, as paragraphs it can harder to grok, and also harder to write with no ambiguity.

Now, part of what I say above can be seen as personal preference (text vs image), but in practice I have found that when using tools like plantuml or mermaid to make C4 diagrams, the result is easier to use, remember, and update than plaintext.

[taeric]

I think I mostly just disagree, here. I want a graphical representation to be more impactful. But typically any system that scales such that a short list can't explain entry points and dependencies has scaled beyond what graphical tools can do, as well.

Now, story boarding a communication sequence between systems can make great use of layout. So, I definitely see potential.