On 24/10/2007, Todd Biske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Oct 24, 2007, at 5:18 AM, "Steve Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I've never seen a decent business > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > architecture described from an event basis. If its T-SOA v EDA then I > > agree, but if its B-SOA then I've just never seen an equivalent B-EDA. > > > > One theory I have on this is that business services are largely under > the control of the business and thus can be defined easily. Business > events, on the hand, frequently originate outside of the business and > thus are far more difficult to define. Thoughts?
In part I'd agree, but I'm not sure that this is actually an issue. I had a real life discussion on just this topic today. There were lots of external events which may over time change but the basic capabilities of the services won't. In other words the same stuff can be triggered by different business events, the important bit is mapping those events onto the business capabilities within the services. So the Business Services say "what" I do as a business the capabilities say "why" I do stuff, and the events say "how" they get kicked off.
