Steve, Although "service oriented architecture" broadly conveys it's meaning, it's precise meaning is open to wide interpretation. My guess is that your definition is quite different from Sandy Carter's definition, as well as Rob's. Our definitions might be closer in alignment, but they are still different.if you ask 5 architects to define SOA, you'll get at least 6 answers. Hence the word has up meaning.
Anne On 1/10/09, Steve Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/1/10 Michael Poulin <[email protected]>: >> SOA - service-oriented architecture - "is a bad word because it doesn't >> tell >> us anything" >> OOD - object-oriented design - "is a bad word because it doesn't tell us >> anything" >> DDD - domain-driven design - "is a bad word because it doesn't tell us >> anything" >> WOA -web-oriented architecture - "is a bad word because it doesn't tell us >> anything" >> MDA - model-driven architecture - "is a bad word because it doesn't tell >> us >> anything" >> POA - process-oriented architecture - "is a bad word because it doesn't >> tell >> us anything" >> ... >> >> So, all these "D" and "A" are bad words. >> >> Now, what are the good words? > > Chocolate and rambunctious are wonderful words. > > The problem is however that in reality very little is ever going to be > conveyed in three words with oriented in the middle > > "Stimulus oriented economics" > > However what SOA/WOA/XOA do say is two things > > What is the most important thing (Services in the case of SOA) and > what domain is it applied within (Architecture). Now that to me has > always been enough for me to understand broadly what it is about. > > Steve > >> >> - Michael >> P.S. In one of famous Russian sarcastic romans, a femail-character used >> only >> 30 words to express all emotions and desires, and everything else. I can >> help to translate this example into English for our use. > > And at the other end of the scale Shakespear invented hundreds if not > thousands of words to convey what he wanted. > > English is a wonderfully creative language but its not meant to be > specific, its meant to be abused which is why we have problems with > clarity in a language that has no real rules. > > Steve > >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Nick Gall <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 1:06:56 AM >> Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] I say SOA was never born - >> How about now? Are WE ready? >> >> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Michael Poulin <m3pou...@yahoo. com> >> wrote: >>> >>> JP said: "I say SOA was never born" >> >> I like this line of JP's better: >> "SOA is a bad word because it doesn't tell us anything." >> -- Nick >> >
