There seem to be a significant number of people in the software engineering community, especially in the US, who believe that a ‘body of knowledge’ for software engineers can be (a) defined (b) agreed and (c) made a requirement for licensing. IMHO, they have really got this wrong:
1. Bodies of knowledge reflect the past not the future. Generally, it is greybeards who get involved in such things because young folks are just getting on with their work/life, etc. BOK’s reflect what these greybeards know and often they don’t know or understand recent important developments. I know – I’m an oldster too – and all the time I have to actively work to stay open-minded about new developments rather than falling back on what I might think of as ‘fundamentals’ but which may be no such thing. Us 60’s folk have to remember one of our heros, Bob Dylan – “don’t criticise what you can’t understand”.
2. There is a truly immense diversity in software engineering and an engineer developing mission critical software for a spacecraft really has very little in common with a developer tailoring SAP systems for an enterprise. The BOK for the former includes lots of hardware stuff, safety, etc; the BOK for the latter, lots of stuff about business and business processes. Really, let’s not kid ourselves that there is some ‘fundamental core’ that is of practical value to both of these types of software engineer.
My SE book reflects my experience and interests in SE – but I would never claim this was some kind of universal body of knowledge.