Oh, this is simply about semantics. RWE is viewed as a result of service's activities; it may be a change in the state of business or technical system. An ESB as an infrastructural element of SOA environment supports service invocation but does not affect service activities (if a service, in turn, uses ESB during its execution, the ESB still does not affect final result of the service activities).
If one deploys a service implemented as a process onto the ESB, the RWE is expected from the process/service, not from the ESB per se. -Michael ----- Original Message ---- From: htshozawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:21:35 PM Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] ESB/Intermediary in SOA (was Data services (was Re: Definition of SOA)) --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Michael Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .> wrote: > > Dear H.Ozawa, you did not get my point - I said that it WAS UNREALISTIC! That is, the realistic ESB does NOT represent a service it engages on the provider side. As a result, the consumer must have a Contract with ESB but this Contract does not make sense because it does not offer any RWE to a consumer. > I read your opinion and would appreciate if you would elaborate why there isn't RWE to a consumer when using ESB. H.Ozawa
