|
Mark wrote
> I don't
think it's a matter of "is" here (as in "*is*
> providing one service or three"). Clearly it's possible to both model > and implement a solution either way. I am suggesting that there is a way of thinking
about (and modelling) services that is reasonably objective, based on
dependency analysis. If so, it is not true that you could model either way, at
least at a logical level. Implementation, though,
is a different matter.
> What's
important is the
> resulting architecture of the implementation, and in this respect the > "3 services" approach offers superior scalability, visibility, > reusability, simplicity, to name just a few benefits. Quite
possibly.
Rgds Ashley
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
