That’s what I use as well! And it works perfectly when what I’m diagramming is pretty simple. It’s just that when I’m trying to diagram anything nontrivial, I can’t map it out on a one dimensional diagram without it turning into a mess. That’s why I created this!
So for example, I’d often want to add some sequences to diagrams, and the only way to do so is by numbering the connections, which in my experience becomes too messy/confusing after the single digits.
Another example is if I’m diagramming an API, the paths that a request takes differs under different conditions/scenarios. So a canonical diagram for a system in a company design doc ends up only illuminating the happy path of a successful request, missing so many detail because it couldn’t fit nicely into one diagram.
Another is my issue with scattered diagrams detailing different subsystems. Eg a high level overview contains many microservices each diagrammed by their own teams. I wanted to be able to hop layers, easily going up and down a subsystem to see how they behave when handling something. And in my experience, decentralized diagrams within an org ends up becoming a guessing game of which one is most up to date and which ones haven’t been deprecated.
Now I understand. Feedback: landing page should probably focus on communicating this: like draw.io, but gracefully handling paths, cases, alternatives, and scenarios. Good job!
Yeah I’ve gotten more draw.io comments than I expected haha. I didn’t know it was mainstream enough to say “like X for Y”, but I’ll add something to mention it. Thanks for the feedback!
