Hitoshi, I have a few questions and disagreements with the presented material.
1) << Different definition of “reusability” - Change by design /by deviation - Change by under specification>> - What is meant by reusability in this context and why it is in quotes? What change you associate with reusability of what? 2) << Definition: Flexibility of a business process is the ability to change a section of a process with minimum impact and minimum effort. >> - to me it is a nonsense. Business process differs from another business process by the process business logic (goals, results and inputs/outcomes may be the same for different processes). Thus, talking about “flexibility of a business process” is the same thing as talking about the flexibility of the process' business logic. However, flexibility is an ability to change in response to the external factor/demand, correct? That is, if I change the process' business logic, I receive – a new process. The only one element that can be changed in the process is the interface(s) between the process itself and the providers of the process' activities/actions. What these providers are is immaterial because the process depends only on the provided results, not on the particular providers. 3) “Flexibility is not a function of service functionality”, please, comment more, I have not got your point here 4) “Domain specific semantic dictionary” vs. UML. It is well-known (sorry for this note) that the Domain specific semantic is limited in the scope by the Domain. You cross the domain – your information looses sense. Since you so confident in Domain specific over the UML, I start thinking about cultural specifics of countries where people frequently change the domain and where they stay with the domain for long time. Am I right? 5)”Designing by semantic model of messages after services are identified services by functional/nonfunctional requirements can enable processes to become more flexible” - I have not understood this 6) “ Services related to change by specification usually impact processes more than changes by design or by deviation” - IMO, a functional change in the service used as the process' action provider is immaterial whilst new functionality provides the same RWE and accessible via the same interface and the old one. That is, the change stays transparent to the consumer of the service (the process in this case). If the service changes in the way that it cannot meet the process' needs, the process cannot perform and simply throws such service away. If the service changes affect only interaction interface with the process, process is affected, but how do you distinguish between the “changes by design” and the “changes by specification” when new design is done due to the change in the specification? Or I miss something big here? - Micahel ________________________________ From: htshozawa <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, December 15, 2009 12:49:52 PM Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Attaining business process flexibility presentation Hi everybody, I've uploaded my presentation on how to attain business process flexibility in a large-scale project. http://blogs. itmedia.co. jp/hozawa/ files/designing_ to_attain_ flexibility_ 20091215. pdf H.Ozawa
