--- In [email protected], Michael Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > a single canonical viewacross an enterprise may exist but not used (this is what I think Steve meant) > - Michael > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 3:04:11 PM > Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: van Hoof on EDA & SOA > > > Depends what you mean by canonical. IME a single canonical view > across an enterprise is pretty much IT suicide. > > Steve >
An enterprise should have a common data dictionary, at a minimum defining the terms and structures shared across groups. But I'm really relating back to Paul's note that the message defines a structure using XML Schema, and that structure is "cannonical" in that any user of the service conforms to it in order to use the service. I would say this message structure should be part of the enterprise data dictionary and reused as appropriate. In this way, its use as a cannonical model could be broader than just as a message set. -Kirstan > 2008/10/17 Kirstan Vandersluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED] com>: > > --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Michael > > Poulin <m3poulin@ .> wrote: > >> > >> Yes, it was deliberate overstatement though based on OASIS SOA RM > > standard. > >> When I talk with people who see value in SOA Projects, I usually > > one of two cases (sometimes, both): > >> 1) it is just an initial first pilot project 'to taste the water', > > and it is OK > >> 2) Web Services are used for application integration w/o going > > into real SOA value of business functionality > >> > >> Actually, I do not mind having SOA projects but only AFTER the > > overall business functionality picture and SOA environment are in > > place: think/see globally and move locally. > > > > Yes, thinking globally and acting locally boils it down nicely. But > > the reality is there is so much project-level development going on > > that the project group can't wait around for a global SOA intiative, > > if one even exists. So what advice would you give them? I would > > say Paul's advice, along with his 4 point clarification, is a good > > start. In a nutshell, define common messages as the basis of the > > interface for an endpoint, using XML Schema, with an eye towards > > using or building a canonical model (e.g. a "Customer"). Without > > this guidance, you'll end up with JBOWS with little or no reuse and > > agility, and you'll add to the chaos that will have to be fixed > > eventually. > > > > -Kirstan > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >
