Steve,

I don't understand why you call WS-CDL a "dynamic" approach. Can you shed some 
light on this, please?


----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----
Von: Steve Ross-Talbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
An: [email protected]
Gesendet: Montag, den 20. November 2006, 13:19:31 Uhr
Betreff: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] [ZapFlash] Thinking Outside the 
SOA Box

I note the following:


"The worlds of Business Process Management (BPM) and SOA are still alarmingly 
distinct. ZapThink has spoken at combined BPM/SOA conferences, but generally 
people attend either the BPM track or the SOA track exclusively, in spite of 
the fact that BPM and SOA share many best practices, and in fact, we would say 
that BPM should be Service-oriented (and correspondingly, that SOA should be 
business process-focused) ."\\


Which is great in as much as I think they are completely correct. But the 
problem is how to do it. I have yet, and maybe I need to get out more, to see a 
decent approach to meld BPM and SOA together in any meaningful way. Most 
approaches I have seen paste the BPM onto some notional SOA. While this may be 
a reasonable experiment it does nothing to really marry the business 
requirements to a solution and so the gap between IT and the business remains 
fairly wide. 


The question we need to ask is what methodology do we employ and what tools do 
we use to support this methodology to deliver a solution to business problems 
that can harness a SOA. 


Having developed several SOA-based solutions over the last year the missing 
piece seems to be how to describe the dynamic model. Static (information) 
models are fairly well known but the dynamic part (the behavior) has less 
support from vendor tools. WS-BPEL based tools are okay for implementation and 
great when you want to get some higher level reuse of existing services. Java 
and attendant IDE's are great productivity tools as is Csharp and Visual 
Studio. But none of these tools really help us describe the dynamic model with 
as much precision as we can when we do the static model. UML doesn't really cut 
the mustard because it doesn't really focus on interactions or communications 
between participants and roles.  


We have been using WS-CDL open source tools (www.pi4tech. com) to create the 
dynamic models and then giving choice as to how to use the static and dynamic 
models to drive forward to an implementation. Choices that we have used are to 
generate 
* UML artifacts for both models and code generate from there
* Java for J2EE environments using an underlying ESB for communications
* Java for Axis environments and use SOAP over HTTP for communications
* HTML documents that textually describe the interactions given to both 
business and IT to agree upon


At least this way the dog wags the tail and not the other way around and we get 
to realise the business benefits of an SOA approach.


Cheers


Steve T


On 16 Nov 2006, at 17:08, Gervas Douglas wrote:




 
 
Thinking Outside the SOA Box
Document ID: ZAPFLASH-20061115 | Document Type: ZapFlash
By Jason Bloomberg

Today, Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) is finally off the ground. Most 
organizations are past the basic planning stage, and are now actively 
constructing their SOA implementations. Much work remains, to be sure; 
standards are incomplete, tools are immature, and companies continue to 
struggle with the political, cultural, and technical challenges that 
architectural change presents. Be that as it may, SOA has turned the corner in 
many ways: we're now focusing more on consuming Services than building them, 
issues of governance have risen to the fore, and organizations are finally 
working through the complexities of SOA quality.
But perhaps the most interesting sign that SOA has reached a new level of 
maturity are the early indications that the focus on SOA as something separate 
from the rest of IT is waning as Service-Oriented best practices gradually 
become accepted more broadly as general IT best practices. The fact that the 
spotlight of hype has shifted from SOA to greener pastures like Enterprise Web 
2.0 is actually an indication that SOA best practices are becoming ubiquitous. 
Ironically, the more ubiquitous SOA becomes, the more it fades from view.
We're in the very early stages of this trend, however. Today, most SOA thinking 
remains "inside the box," in that we're still thinking of SOA as a set of 
activities and best practices separate from the rest of IT. Such inside the box 
thinking helps us understand what is still a new approach to organizing IT 
capabilities and leveraging them as flexible business resources. But there is a 
problem with this limited thinking: the business just doesn't care about the 
SOA box. After all, business managers care about solving the various problems 
the business faces on a day-to-day basis; when they require IT to help solve 
those problems, they generally don't care if the particular solution IT brings 
to the table is Service-oriented or not. In a fundamental way, therefore, 
inside the box SOA thinking places limitations on SOA's relevance to the 
business.
Recognizing the SOA Box
Retiring the SOA box, therefore, is an important step in providing value to the 
business, and the first step in getting rid of the SOA box is in recognizing 
its existence. By "SOA box" we mean the assumption that SOA is something 
distinct from other approaches that would therefore be non-SOA in some way. 
Inside the box SOA thinking affects all corners of the greater IT community, 
including IT end-users, consultants, and vendors. It behooves all these 
parties, therefore, to recognize the aspects of the SOA box that limit their 
thinking, in order to think outside the SOA box. We see the SOA box pattern of 
thought in many different areas of discourse. Some examples of SOA thinking 
that currently fall within the box:
·                 SOA Quality is as yet quite distinct from traditional 
software quality assurance (SQA). SQA is code-focused, and generally takes 
place during one phase of the software development lifecycle. SOA Quality, on 
the other hand, is a continual process that deals with metadata, relationships 
among Services, as well as the quality and performance of the underlying code.
·                 Many architects are still posing the wrong question. They're 
asking, "this SOA is cool; how do I sell it to the business?" instead of 
asking, "these are the business's most pressing problems; what are the best 
approaches to solving them?" When architects identify SOA as a distinct 
capability and bring that to the business, they typically meet with resistance. 
Instead, if they consider Service-oriented best practices as tools in their 
toolbelt, where their jobs as architects is to know which tool is the right 
tool for solving the business problem at hand, then they will likely find that 
the business will support their efforts to effect architectural change.
·                 The worlds of Business Process Management (BPM) and SOA are 
still alarmingly distinct. ZapThink has spoken at combined BPM/SOA conferences, 
but generally people attend either the BPM track or the SOA track exclusively, 
in spite of the fact that BPM and SOA share many best practices, and in fact, 
we would say that BPM should be Service-oriented (and correspondingly, that SOA 
should be business process-focused).
·                 The "lipstick on the pig" phenomenon is still dismayingly 
alive and well in the vendor community, as some vendors slap Service 
capabilities onto their older technologies in order to call them SOA products. 
Not only do such products still retain all the inflexibility and brittleness 
that plagued them beforehand, such vendors are also fooling their customers 
into believing that their products really do help them implement SOA. 
Furthermore, such SOA pretenders shift attention away from other vendors who 
have truly rearchitected (or newly architected) their products to follow 
Service-oriented principles in such a way as to truly enable their customers to 
succeed with their SOA initiatives.
Thinking Outside the SOA Box
Such inside the box thinking both restricts the value the business can get from 
SOA, and also introduces skepticism about SOA across the organization. Clearly, 
grasping the full impact of SOA long-term requires out of the box thinking. 
Fortunately, thinking outside the box is only difficult when no one is doing 
it; once people realize that existing patterns of thought are too limiting and 
begin to expand the context of their understanding, then the box breaks down. 
Here are some notable examples of indications that people are finally starting 
to think outside of the SOA box:
·                 ZapThink's recent SOA Consulting report concluded that while 
there is more SOA-related consulting taking place than ever before, companies 
are generally not asking for SOA by name. Instead, businesses are asking for 
solutions to their business problems, and consulting firms are increasingly 
leveraging SOA best practices to address those needs, even though those 
projects aren't "SOA projects."
·                 The SOA Management market has largely consolidated, as the 
vendors who first built out Web Services Management products that they later 
renamed SOA Management have found that the core challenges of SOA management 
are traditional IT management problems: network, systems, and applications 
management. As a result, the practices of IT Service Management, SOA 
Management, as well as Business Service Management are beginning to converge.
·                 Organizations increasingly realize that the movement to 
Service Orientation changes the way in which they manage IT projects as a 
whole, and not just the Service-oriented ones. As companies move to more 
iterative means of IT delivery, and as those capabilities utilize 
Service-oriented approaches to dealing with change and heterogeneity, IT 
development as a whole will encompass and embody the best practices of 
Service-oriented development, leveraging the Service Lifecycle for overall IT 
project development.
·                 The more narrow definition of SOA Governance consists of 
applying governance practices to SOA implementations, for example, making sure 
that developers are following reuse policies, and ensuring running Services 
conform to policies around security and service levels. Increasingly, however, 
people are defining SOA governance more broadly, thinking about how to tackle 
broader governance challenges in the context of SOA, once they have SOA in 
place.
·                 Many organizations are setting up SOA centers of excellence 
in their organizations, which are essentially teams of architects who create a 
set of guidelines for the adoption and implementation of SOA across the 
enterprise. Many of these Centers of Excellence, however, are extensions of 
existing Integration Competency Centers, and in many cases, they are acting as 
Enterprise Architecture Centers of Excellence, centralizing best practices for 
architecture more broadly than just for SOA.
The ZapThink Take
The common thread that ties these illustrations together is that the older 
thinking presumes that SOA represents something distinct: a distinct set of 
best practices or a separate market, for example. But in reality, as SOA 
matures, people find that SOA best practices are simply best practices, and SOA 
markets, practices, and projects are becoming indistinguishable from the larger 
software, hardware, and professional services markets, best practices, and IT 
projects of which they are a part.
It's possible to misinterpret this trend and incorrectly conclude that SOA is 
fading in importance. In fact, there's even a "SOA is passé" thread through the 
industry that supposes that SOA is losing importance because SOA best practices 
are gradually losing their SOA label. However, nothing could be further from 
the truth: there's more SOA than ever going on today, only now people are 
actually doing it more so than talking about it.
In fact, ZapThink predicts that by the end of the decade, SOA best practices 
will become so widely accepted and commonplace that there will remain very 
little discussion of SOA in any corner of IT: vendors won't use SOA in their 
product messaging, consultants won't offer SOA practice areas, and IT end-users 
won't be running SOA projects. Instead, all aspects of IT activity will simply 
be Service-oriented. Successfully thinking outside the SOA box will cause the 
box itself to fade from view, indicating not that SOA has diminished in 
importance, but on the contrary, that SOA practices will have become ubiquitous.







        

        
                
___________________________________________________________ 
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de

Reply via email to