> I believe many parts of the standard were under long and serious discussions
> and the search for compromises in the Committee, that is why they have such
> abstract definitions, especially the ones, mentioned by Shashank.
>
> I do not see a lack but too much compromises between an intention to make
> the SAO business-oriented architecture and an intention of IT vendors to
> continue making money on application tools, aka application-oriented
> approach.
> According to Shashank, "SOA is an architectural approach that seeks to
> align business processes with service protocols and the underlying software
> components and legacy applications that implement them." To me, it is
> exactly opposite!
>
Interesting observation.
>
(Now we have an interesting precedent caused by the standard.) At
last, the "service protocols and the underlying software components
and legacy applications" have to be aligned with the business
process. That is, IT's got critical mass in technology and now IT has
to partner with the business minding business functions, not IT own
technology-centric interests. As you know, 'who is paying money those
order the music'…
>
> I do have found relatively clear definitions of " visibility, awareness,
> real-world effect, willingness, reachability", "those in needs" and "those
> with capabilities" in the standards. Probably, it worth reading it a few
> times because, as I said, it is an attempt to position technical architecture
> in the real business world.
> - Michael Poulin
My issue is not with abstraction. but with proper abstraction.
Look at the paper again, there is no architecture diagram for
reference model? But their is a diagram for how SOA RM relates to
other work?? Wherein in SOA implementation (not spec nor RM) seems to
be the biggest block.
Service oriented Architecture implementation is the biggest block??
Reference model just guides or just a small part of Architecture work??
How can you define the artifacts of the systems without having
identified artifacts and their relations with each other?
Though the relation with Requirement, motivation and Goals has been
shown but no description for the same is mentioned in the paper?
regards,
shashank
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> 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/
