in 2000. I was quite impressed by Robert's clear and
concise English and more impressed by the content he
taught.
As Robert mentioned in his paper, there are three
levels of architecture (with my reinterpretation):
enterprise level, line of business level (or business
process, application), and applicaton constituents
level. I think some of principles Robert taught such
as Open/Close principle applies to all three levels.
I think SOA is at the top level: enterprise level.
The evolution of SW architecture has changed its scope
to enterprise wide. OO architcture can be used at
lower two levels to shape packages and classes. SOA
must be at the level of enterprise. Therefor SOA is a
part of enterprise architecture. So the way we look
at SOA is that SOA and OO architectures coexist at
different levels. SOA should be defined first
followed by lower levels. Since SOA is enterprise
wide architecture define first, the lower level
architectures are aligned and their components are
designed with enterprise wide usage in mind.
I agree with you Patrick that my statement is
difficult to understand. I am from a historical
standpoint to see the evolution of SW technology.
Each version of technology in different phase of
evolution embodies different capabilities and solve
different type of problems. I will address these in
emails responding to others.
Best regards
Jerry
--- patrickdlogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Object orientation describes the world as it is.
> Service
> > orientation describe the world as it is to be.
> Functional
> > orientation describes the world as mathematics.
> Assembly language is
> > machine orientation and describes the world as it
> is computers. So
> > SOA is software architecture in the same sense as
> any architecture
> > of preceding technologies.
>
> I am sorry. I find this useless.
>
> Object-oriented software design has a set of
> engineering principles. A
> really good set that I have used for years...
>
> PDF:
>
http://www.objectmentor.com/resources/articles/Principles_and_Patterns.PDF
>
> These principles can be used to design new systems
> that meet the
> needs of the business, are maintainable, etc. They
> can be used to
> design distributed, integrated, evolvable systems.
>
> There is nothing remotely like this in utility that
> I know of for "SOA".
>
> Instead we get these sayings like, "OO describes the
> world as it
> is. SOA describes the world as it is to be."
>
> I find no value in such a statement. How does an
> engineer or an
> business analyst use this kind of statement?
>
> -Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
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.
