William, We all owe you a debt of gratitude for livening up this Group. If you disagree with a point someone makes, I think we would all benefit from your specific criticisms and arguments. There are those who indulge in self-promotion - I guess this is because they want to get more business. I cannot justly accuse Gregg of this. As I have mentioned, I discourage blatant billboarding, but I also feel that the members of this Group are grown-ups (I certainly cannot imagine a juvenile having the faintest interest in SOA), and know how to interpret what they read.
Keep up the good work! Gervas --- In [email protected], William Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Anne > > Thanks for your remarks. I don't think we should sensor Gregg either. > I didn't suggest censorship to Gervas. I'm sorry that Gervas' e- mail > gave you that impression. I suggested some coaching on a bit of > restraint. We all practice some restraint on this group (self > censorship). Just because we have a forum where we can share ideas > and experience and we do indulge in some self promotion from time to > time doesn't mean we should push our agenda on every argument. There > are many points of view on this forum including but not only: WS- *, > ESB, REST, JBI, J2EE, JINI, CORBA, EAI, MOM BPM, BPEL, etc. etc. but > most of us practice some form of self-censorship because we are > mindful that there other views and ways of solving these problems. > Maybe I'm wrong here and I should start promoting the technology/ > product that I have an interest in more aggressively. But I think > that's a turn off. > > Gregg, I apologize to you and the group. What I should have done was > try to contact you directly and discussed your position and passion > and if appropriate and acceptable provide some coaching. I perhaps > wrongly assumed from many of your replies that you were not open to > such a discussion. I'm sorry. Gregg if you'd like to talk please use > my e-mail below to make contact. > > And any of you please feel free to provide me some coaching too. > (Like what not to send to a moderator ;-) > (Sorry Gervas, but I'm not into letting this get into some sort of > public religious battle I don't have the time.) > > My addresses are william at ipbabble.com or william.henry at iona.com > > Thank you for your patience, > William > > > > On Mar 2, 2006, at 5:03 AM, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > > > Although Gregg does occasionally get a bit passionate in his > > arguments, I, for one, appreciate his comments and the insight into > > an alternate approach. (I don't recommend it, mind you, but I > > always welcome an opposing viewpoint.) > > > > William -- if allowing Gregg to continue his tirades means you will > > leave the group, so be it. I will be sorry to see you go. But I > > don't think we should censor Gregg. > > > > Anne > > > > On 3/2/06, Gervas Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I look forward to the day when military staff colleges refer to the > > debates in this Group when looking for instruction and inspiration. > > > > Gervas > > > > --- In [email protected], William Henry > > <william_henry@> wrote: > > > > > > Okay has anyone else had enough of this? Is this the Jini list or > > the > > > SOA list? > > > > > > I've tried to ignore this Java centric stuff, as I know others have > > > too. We do this in the hope not to get drawn into tedious fruitless > > > arguments. I've watched several people try to teach that there are > > > other technologies in the world that we must deal with in SOA and > > > that Java will NOT be acceptable in those environments. Not that > > Java > > > can't solve the problem but because it's not appropriate. Heck many > > > of us could integrate everything in C, or Perl or even assembly > > > language but we wouldn't because it's not appropriate in many > > places. > > > Our "teachable" remarks have often been met with ... well more Jini. > > > > > > Java is a wonderful language. I've developed in it many times since > > > 1995/96 (recently doing some JBI stuff) Jini may be wonderful - I > > may > > > never know because I've been put off looking further into it. But > > > many of the rest of us work in large enterprise environments where > > > there is lots of heterogeneity. And we want to integrate natively > > > with that environment in a high performance way. The idea about SOA > > > is that all technologies should be able to participate as first > > class > > > citizens. We should not have to wrap everything in one technology/ > > > language. > > > > > > To those of you implementing SOA with Jini then maybe the Jini > > advise > > > is good. I'm certainly no expert in Jini. There is a Jini group > > that > > > much of this advice would be more appropriate on: http:// > > > groups.yahoo.com/group/jini_javaspaces/. Perhaps this advise is > > > already been posted and maybe ignored there. To those of you > > > implementing SOA in a more heterogeneous environment, be cautious. > > > > > > If I've offended people I'm sorry but I can't sit back and just > > > ignore this. I was enjoying learning and sharing on this group and > > > then noticed I'd stopped watching it more because I was getting > > > bombarded with Jini and missing the important SOA discussions. > > > > > > Gervas if I'm no longer welcome on this group then fair enough. > > > > > > William > > > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 2006, at 11:06 AM, Gregg Wonderly wrote: > > > > > > > Spork, Murray wrote: > > > >>> I would hope that I could just do a Jini lookup using the > > > >>> interface named BuyCheddarCheese. > > > >> > > > >> But this way we would have to agree on the names of every single > > > >> complex > > > >> type - whereas the alternative and more decoupled approach is > > > >> where we > > > >> only have to agree on the names of the atomic concepts and on the > > > >> operators that we use to compose them. Some refer to "minimal > > > >> ontological comittment" to describe this. > > > > > > > > I want to buy cheddar cheese. When I go to the store, there are a > > > > bunch of gray > > > > boxes with no labels that I have open to find out whether I've got > > > > the box of > > > > cheddar cheese right? And, I also don't have to whack of a bit to > > > > chew on and > > > > hope that I got the cheddar cheese, and not the orange bacterial > > > > culture. > > > > > > > >> Less formal pattern-based approaches really try to achieve the > > same > > > >> thing - i.e. "duck typing". > > > >> > > > >> There are well-known tradeoffs of course. > > > > > > > > Duck Typing involves type modification based on type analysis, not > > > > the lack of > > > > typing. > > > > > > > >>> This is an important design issue. Is it more important that > > > >>> goods can travel the network or the transaction? > > > >> > > > >> I don't understand this point. > > > > > > > > Are we shipping cheese around the network or are we using the > > > > network to perform > > > > a transaction to buy cheese? It's the transaction that needs > > to be > > > > performed! > > > > > > > > Thus, I would choose a service interface named BuyCheddarCheese > > > > instead of > > > > BuyGoods that received a Goods parameter that was CheddarCheese > > > > extends Goods. > > > > > > > > If I wanted to find the Schwanns food companies service, and ask > > > > for inventory > > > > and look it over to select a product, that's where Goods would be > > > > fine. But in > > > > my example, I specifically need to find the CheddarCheese. > > > > BuyCheddarCheese > > > > might just be an implementation of the interface BuyGoods, whose > > > > implementation > > > > is aimed at the system methods for purchasing CheddarCheese. > > > > > > > > public interface BuyGoods extends Remote { > > > > public double buy( int quantity ) > > > > throws InvalidTransactionException, IOException; > > > > } > > > > > > > > public interface BuyCheddarCheese extends BuyGoods { > > > > } > > > > > > > > This is an example implementation just to show how the typing can > > > > be applied in > > > > an execution path that is separate from the interface definition. > > > > Thus, this > > > > interface is very generic, yet it is strongly typed to allow > > > > precise matching to > > > > occur. > > > > > > > > public class CheddarCheeseImpl implements BuyCheddarCheese { > > > > private Patron patron; > > > > Vending vend; > > > > public CheddarCheeseImpl( Patron pat, Vending vend ) { > > > > this.patron = pat; > > > > this.vend = vend; > > > > } > > > > public double buy( int quantity ) { > > > > FoodProduct fp = vend.getProduct > > ( FoodProduct.CheddarCheese ); > > > > Transaction trans = vend.getTransaction( patron ); > > > > Order ord = fp.placeOrder( trans, quantity ); > > > > double price = order.getCost( pat ); > > > > if( patron.canPay(price) == false ) > > > > throw new PriceExceededException(price); > > > > trans.commit(); > > > > return price; > > > > } > > > > } > > > > > > > > Somehow I have to know who is selling cheddar cheese. Searching > > > > through > > > > 10,000,000 vendors lists of products is insane. I should be able > > > > to through out > > > > a type based query. > > > > > > > > On Google, you don't open a web page and search with your eyes > > through > > > > 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 documents. You use a "type" based > > > > query giving it > > > > the type of information that you want. The type mapping system is > > > > faulty > > > > thought, because its not strict. So, you won't always get what > > you > > > > want, and > > > > you can't guarantee that every day, the query you ran yesterday > > > > will provide the > > > > same results. > > > > > > > > Only through specific typing systems can production software make > > > > exacting > > > > requests and have well formed requirements that can be met. > > > > > > > > My observation is that a lot of the friction around strict typing > > > > comes from > > > > people implementing poor type systems and also from them using > > > > insufficiently > > > > rich technologies to allow typing to not be a barrier. > > > > > > > > The people implementing really strict typing languages are, > > from my > > > > perspective, > > > > the people that grew up with the UNIX shell environment in the > > 70's > > > > and 80's and > > > > learned all about how bad "everying's a string" can be. > > > > > > > > Gregg Wonderly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > > Computer software Computer aided design software Computer job > > Soa Service-oriented architecture > > > > 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. > > > > > 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/
