I've been in several conversations along these lines, specifically around
governing anonymous consumers of a service. Check out my blog over the next
few days for my thoughts on the subject.
Pilamaya yelo(Thank you),
Timothy Vibbert ("SOA Chief")
SOA Strategist/Architect/Evangelist
p/f: 609.654.2278
m: 609.969.1004
twitter : soachief
linkedin : Tim Vibbert
facebook : Tim Vibbert
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 6:59 PM, htshozawa <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Back from another assignment. :-)
>
> --- In
> [email protected]<service-orientated-architecture%40yahoogroups.com>,
> Michael Poulin <m3pou...@...> wrote:
> >
> > However, I have some problems with proposed SOA definition, in particular
> with "focuses on design of systems from the perspective of providers and
> consumers as defined by a contract. SOA-based designs introduce agility by
> enabling interchangeability of service providers without requiring process
> changes in the consumers." As we know, when we design SO architecture, we do
> not (cannot) anticipate the service consumers and scenarios where the
> services will be used. This means, we cannot talk about 'contracts' because
> the sense of this word assumes an agreements between parties; if one party
> is unknown, what the agreement may be?
> >
> True if we are talking about providing services for general audiences, but
> in most cases users want to limit who can use their services and only a few
> limited services are offered to general audiences.
>
> H.Ozawa
>
>
>
