Read this: http://www.paulgraham.com/taste.html.
I was originally focused on "beauty". Clearly, good design is beautiful. Isn't that obvious? Why so many words to explain the obvious?
The post seemed useless. Why write it in the first place? Why share it? Why share it now, 12 years after it was written?
Because beauty can be elusive to some people. A more complete definition of some attributes of beauty are helpful.
This is not a throw-away concept. These are fourteen essential elements that need to be used as part of every software architectural design review. Indeed, it should be part of every code review.
Although code perhaps shouldn't be "daring."
When we adopt an architecture, it should fit these criteria. This doesn't replace more pragmatic software quality assurance considerations. See http://www.sei.cmu.edu/reports/95tr021.pdf. I'm currently delighted with "Good design is redesign."