I think there's an argument to be made that services are more "data oriented" 
than anything else, and while I agree that processing the message is the first 
responsibility of the service I also think there needs to be some kind of 
description of what that service does, and if it's machine readable that's 
helpful to program-program communications.

Eric


----- Original Message ----
From: Jan Algermissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2007 10:51:19 AM
Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Booch on SOA & Architecture



On 08.02.2007, at 14:44, Eric Newcomer wrote:


I think what Steve said in the previous post is very important.  To gain the 
benefit of service orientation it's important to design and model software 
systems in terms of functions (services) rather than things (objects) since 
functions are more naturally aligned with "what we do" as people and 
businesses. 


Hmm,  wouldn't it be more enlightening to emphasize payload instead of 
interface design? I think the real difference between an OO design and a 
service design is to be found in the kind of payload the remote system accepts. 
Services, uuh, endpoints should IMHO be designed around business documents, not 
around the idea of moving from OO- (back) to functional design.


Think 'Order' and 'OrderProcessor'  and not service.HandleOrder ()


Jan









Given the service abstraction, implementation is a separate issue.  As we have 
heard many times on this list a wide variety of technologies can be used for 
implementation.  The most important thing is to get the design right - meaning 
to meet the business requirements, to align with the services that the business 
provides for its customers, or other departments.

Eric


----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED] org>
To: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2007 7:58:18 AM
Subject: Re: [service-orientated -architecture] Booch on SOA & Architecture


On 2/8/07, Dan Creswell <[EMAIL PROTECTED] org> wrote:
> Hmmm,
>
> "Obviously someone who can't give up objects in favor of services"
>
> Someone thinking in objects has serious wrong-thinking in terms of
> design full stop!

RESTful design is largely object-oriented, and I've had no trouble
designing very large scale systems using it. REST was at one time
called the "HTTP Object Model", in fact.

It's also why I've continued to use "distobj" as my email address.

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbake r.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus. com






Get your own web address.
Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. 





 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

Reply via email to