Very good point, Rob. Do you think this is a good candidate to become one of the SO principles? It is not about implementation, it is still about 'What is What", IMO.
The criteria for 'properly' that I use is business values and meanings of the business functionality decomposition. I stop splitting it at the moment where any smaller 'features' do not make business sense any more. It is individual in each domain and each cases. - Michael ________________________________ From: Rob Eamon <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 11:43:56 PM Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Joe on Microsoft's combination of SOA & Storage --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Michael Poulin <m3pou...@.. .> wrote: > > 2) if you properly design your business service, you should never > MANAGE data you service works with, you have to > process/massage/ transform the data, not manage, and by no means - > manage data store. "Properly designed"--isn' t that the core of all these discussions? What constitutes properly? ;-) You're gonna have to define what "mangage data" really means to you cuz this makes no sense to me. Are other services allowed to CRUD your service data? What set of principles are you following to drive this separation of logic and data implementation? It doesn't seem like an SO principle. SO principles are more or less mum about service implementation details. -Rob
