I found no disagreement with below other than terminology. Most human efforts are not solitary but a product of collective efforts. Any work design confronting two simultanious tasks: divide the work into parts and coordination between the parts. In SW industry, it is the different schemes of dividing and coordinating that represent the evolution of SW technologies. We call the SW parts objects that represent different things in different SW technologies.
I see three types of objects: OO objects, CO objects, and SO objects. Their modeling tools should be different that is a different issue. I agree that UML is not sufficient to model services and new tools are needed. As the latest SW technology evolution, SO objects are inclusive to the previous version of technologies in the SW evolution, hence encompass the variety of technologies and different "orientations". Jerry --- Eric Newcomer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Right - another example is asynchronous messaging > queuing, like what we're doing with AMQP, which is > becoming more and more important as SOA tends more and more toward loosely-coupled interactions. In > total the industry could really benefit from some > better "top down" or "contract first" tooling that > defines the service contract first and then allows a > choice of implementation. If you tie the tools to > OO, and derive the service from an object, it's more > difficult for the SOA to encompass the variety of > technologies and "orientations" that exist. > > Eric > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 1:04:25 PM > Subject: Re: MDA/UML/OO and SOA (was Re: > [service-orientated-architecture] John on Gartner, > AJAX & Assorted TLAs) > > One issue I've got with UML for SOA modelling is > that its fine when thinking about software, but a > bit rubbish when thinking about the business. Its > also a little "rich" in terms of communication to > the business. Another challenge is that some > services are best implemented using BPM, or Human > Workflow, type tools which really don't fit into the > UML language. > > UML is fine for some SOA systems, and a bit rubbish > for others, what we do need (IMO) is something that > sits above all of these different approaches and > models just the services and their interactions (not > process) then we can pick the right implementation > modelling technology for each of the services. > > Steve > > > On 20/08/06, Stefan Tilkov <stefan.tilkov@ > innoq.com> wrote: > On Aug 19, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Lukas Barton wrote: > > Stefan Tilkov wrote: > >> +1. In fact, I don't think there has ever been a > "good" UML tool - > >> in the sense of "good for automated software > development". > > We could start DML vs DSL debate ;-) > > > Not much of a difference to me -- DML graphical, DSL > textual, > otherwise similar enough so it doesn't matter. > > > > Do you agree that: "Proprietary tools which worked > mostly were DSL."? > > > > > No. In my personal experience, most model-driven > projects, SOA or > not, were driven from UML models, more or less > heavily customized via > UML profiles. > > > >> A UML profile is a poor man's metamodel, so this > could > >> conceptually be used with MOF or EMF, too. The > problem is that one > >> has to define what the exact SOA metamodel is :-) > > But there is no standardised profile for SOA. > > OMG started SOA SIG (http://soa.omg. org/) only > few month ago. Can > > you guess whether this group goals could be > successful? (eg. create > > SOA metamodel, ...). > > May be I overestimate necessity of standards. But > without standard > > you get a mess (eg. not cooperating tools...). > > > > > Even with a custom UML profile, the commonality is > large enough for > people to understand your models because UML is so > widespread. If > only the tools sucked less ... > > > Stefan > -- > Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq. com/blog/ st/ > > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com 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/
