Then they would be OAGIS-compliant, they still would not be SOA-
compliant. Moreover, they would have a modular (flexible,
agile, ...) architecture that facilitates best-of-breed approaches to
solutions development.
__________________________________
JP Morgenthal
President & CEO
Avorcor, Inc.
46440 Benedict Drive
Suite 103
Sterling, VA 20164
(703) 649-0829 x 101: Office
(703) 554-5301 : Cell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________
Confidential: The information in this e-mail message (including any
attachments) is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named
above and as such is privileged and confidential. If you are not an
intended recipient of this message or an agent responsible for
delivering it to the intended recipient(s), be hereby notified that
you have received this message in error. Any review, dissemination,
distribution, printing or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you believe you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this
message from your system(s).
On Jun 27, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Teresa Jones wrote:
I agree that in this context it was pure marketing speak and I
shall be leaving that claim well out of my review of the product.
However, I think that the point that Todd raised was important – if
an application vendor can say “yes, we have all these services
available in our application, and you can use them directly if you
wish” it could be a valuable consideration if a potential buyer
wanted to be able to pick and choose the services that they
actually wanted to use. But how could a vendor actually claim this?
I know that at least one apps vendor is now looking at things like
the OAGIS standards for ‘business objects’ and starting to use
these. Is this the way forward?
Teresa
From: Mark D. Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 June 2007 18:04
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [service-orientated-architecture] SOA-compliant
For this term to have meaning one would have to ask “Compliant
according to what defined standard or specification?”. If I assert
that a Web Service is compliant with WS-I Basic Profile 1.0, that
assertion can be tested either manually by reviewing its
characteristics against the published rules or in an automated
fashion using one or more tools. In short, my compliance claim
could be verified.
This vendor’s claim of “SOA compliance” can neither be proved nor
disproved in absence of some finite set of compliance tests or at
least a widely agreed upon specific definition. Their claim is
like claiming “object orientation compliant” or “distributed
computing compliant” or “client server compliant”. It is a
marketing construct and useless for any real evaluation of their
product.
Thanks,
Mark
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Teresa Jones
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 9:30 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] SOA-compliant
I'm currently looking at a CRM product that the vendor claims is
'SOA-compliant' yet it is also claimed to be an n-tier architecture. A
quick search on the concept of SOA-compliance brought up this
article:-
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/eai/engineering/archives/my-soa-
compliant-toaster-and-cell-phone-7362
which was quite fun!
I suspect that the CRM vendor concerned actually means that you can
integrate with it using web services....
Question for the group - can an application be regarded as
SOA-compliant? Or is that rather a meaningless phrase?
thanks
Teresa
This Message has been scanned by www.blackspider.com
Click here to report this email as spam.
