Alexander Johannesen wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 05:31, Nick Gall <[email protected] > <mailto:nick.gall%40gmail.com>> wrote: > > My point is that in common usage, "integration" is rarely pejorative and > > usually connotes the concept of being designed to work together from the > > start -- NOT retrofitting the ability to work together. > > As someone who's spent 14 years in companies doing integration, I'd > say you live in a fantasy world. :) Integration projects are often > very messy things, so even if the pipe-dream of everything being > designed to work together from the get go is there, it is very far > from reality. Besides, are you trusting sales materials from BMW more > than integration practitioners?
Integration work happens when systems are designed without integration points, or there was not enough foresight possible at the conception of the system to know what integration points would be necessary. Modern software experiences have led people to understand Service Provider Interface (SPI) as something that is a great mechanism for integration so that a new "service provider" can be built and installed to meet the original API that the system needed for that service provider, while still allow it to be provided in a different manner. This is what Service Oriented has always meant to me... Gregg Wonderly
