Anne
On 12/20/05, jeffrschneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But in reality, SCA is not a component model. The granularity of the
> "components" is different from any previous component model. They are
> services -- not components. SCA is a services assembly model.
Anne,
If you use the 'Syzerpski Test' for components:
1. Is it a unit of independent deployment?
2. Is it a unit of 3rd party consumption
3. Does it have No externally observable state?
Where do you believe SCA fails the 'component' litmus test?
Also, you used the term 'granularity'; what kind of granularity are
you referring to: accounting, abstraction, analysis, compilation,
delivery, deployment, dispute, extension, fault containment,
instantiation, installation, loading, locality, mainteneance, system
management - or the old stand-by, INTERFACE?
Jeff
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Most low income homes are not online. Make a difference this holiday season!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/5UeCyC/BWHMAA/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/
SPONSORED LINKS
| Service-oriented architecture | Computer monitoring software | Computer and internet software |
| Free computer monitoring software |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
