Judge by yourself: aggregated services comprise self-contained services ( at the bottom of the service pyramid) while composite applications may contain non-service which we might not know how to deal with. I dislike this potential ambiguity.
- Michael ----- Original Message ---- From: Patrick May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:20:15 AM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Legacy into SOA (was Vandersluis on a Data Abstraction Layer's Benefits) On 29 Jun 2008, at 15:19, Michael Poulin wrote: If you mean Web Service when talking about service, I understand what you said. I definitely didn't mean to limit my statement to Web Services. The plethora of Web Service standards is just one, not particularly elegant, way of implementing services. I was speaking in terms of the general concept of a service, not one implementation technology. Nevertheless, I stay with my statement. I tried to explane this in one of my latest posts. Personally, I am in favor of aggregated services rather than composite applications. Is the difference between those two deeper than mere semantics? Regards, Patrick ---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] S P Engineering, Inc. Large scale, mission-critical, distributed OO systems design and implementation. (C++, Java, Common Lisp, Jini, middleware, SOA)
