Jan Algermissen wrote: > On Oct 30, 2005, at 5:35 PM, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > > > From my perspective (and I realize that lots of people disagree > > with me on this point), the essential concept in SOA is reusability. > > Since SOA does *not* do away with the coupling between type and > interface that distribution architectuires such as CORBA and RMI > inherited from their OO roots, I feel we should ask the question: > What is it then that makes SOA different from any other OO-style > distribution architecture? And how is this beneficial for building > distributed systems? > > The only thing that I can really see is, like Anne said, reusability > (having communication peers agree on service (and thus interface) > semantics up front while keeping a focus on maximizing the number of > other peers that could make use of these service semantics.
The act of distributing access to software to other entities on other computer limits the exposure of various parts of the underlying software system. I.e. the interface or XML document only conveys what is visible. This limitation of the interface to the world actually enables the software to be more service oriented and less module oriented. There are numerous other things that change when you distribute software functions out for other software systems to access and use. In the end, the software's activities can now be re-used for an infinite number of uses. Gregg Wonderl ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Most low income households are not online. Help bridge the digital divide today! http://us.click.yahoo.com/cd_AJB/QnQLAA/TtwFAA/NhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
