This views SOA as though it were a distinct architectural level, rather than a style of architecture.
My view is that SOA does not infer any scope and does not define a new level. SO can be applied to BA, EA, IA, or AA (or whatever). SOA is not a replacement for EA or something you do in addition to EA. If an SOA group exists and is operating at the EA level, and an EA group also exists, expect conflicts. They are both doing EA though likely in different ways (different styles). "SOA is something you do" is a popular phrase. I'd like to modify that a bit to "Architecture is something you do, perhaps in an SO way." -Rob --- In [email protected], A W <ashra...@...> wrote: > > I think there is a similarity and differences between EA and SOA and they > are overlapped with each other. > for example, SOA and EA and their corresponding governance reveal a great > deal of overlap in their concepts, activities, processes, and outcomes. > For example, both require input based on business objectives and produce > outcomes that are tied to and measured against these objectives. > Furthermore, both aim to address issues on the enterprise level (strategy > and planning, reference architecture, and so on), and at the same time their > governance models are similar. > An enterprise that's adopting SOA while developing EA and its governance may > encounter problems if the similarities and overlaps between EA and SOA are > not recognized and accounted for. > If we look at business architecture domain, SOA address the business > processes while EA addresses the business architecture. > From application architecture domain, SOA address servcies and components > while the EA address the application architecture as a whole. > Integration middle ware architecture domain, SOA addresses Integration > architecture / ESB, while EA concerns with technology architecture. > Data archiytcure is addressed by SOA while EA address the information > architecture. > and from operations architecture domanis, SAO addressesQoS, security, > monitoring & infrastructure while EA again concerns with the whole > technology architecture. > As Dr. Mamdouh Ibrahim, from IBM advices us, "To reduce headaches in the > process, make sure you have well-planned architecture governance and SOA > governance models as well as a better understanding of how they should work > together. And take advantage of the lessons learned by those who have gone > before youlike the ones we've outlined in this articleto save time and > money during your own engagement." > > > All the best > Ashraf Galal > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:40 PM, David Chappell > <david.chapp...@...>wrote: > > > Anyone out there have any nuggets of wisdom on the relationship between > > EA and integration architecture? > > I know you won't disappoint me :) > > Dave > > > > > > [image: Oracle Email Signature Logo] > > > > Dave Chappell | VP & Chief Technologist, SOA > > > > > > > > author, "Enterprise Service Bus" (O'Reilly) | "Java Web Services" > > (O'Reilly) | > > > > "The Java Message Service" (O'Reilly) | "Professional ebXML Foundations", > > (Wrox Press) > > > > > > > > 781.359.8729 (office)| 617-510-6566 (mobile) > > Oracle Corp | 8 New England Executive Park, Burlington MA 01803 > > > > [image: Green Oracle] <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> > > > > Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect > > the environment > > > > > > >
