Cory,
I will spend
the next 24 hours reading and thinking carefully about the materials I
find at
www.osera.modeldriven.org
I have been
aware of your effort but not the
specifics.
Cyrille's work
on extending BCM focuses on some common issues… such as 'which
technology should be used"
'usage
of other technologies like ESB (with WS-RM & WS-Notification),
ebSOA, SEE'
In a very
broad use case, one might start out with several groups (such as
ourselves) being separated by our use of language and individual
conceptualizations. How can collaboration/interoperability be
developed that STARTS with a deep analysis of the full set of issues
(the interaction space). What services are needed to facilitate
that collaboration/interoperability?
Wow!!
Joe and
Farrukh , for example obviously have great respect of the other's
work, but somehow there is not an agreement on something that is
a core issue. So is there a service that is needed here?
What would this service be called?
Reconciliation
of terminology issues is one way to tease out these differences between
individual conceptualizations and to then allow a synthesis based on a
deeper (commonly felt) expression of
purpose.
To a very
great extent, Cyrille's and mine approaches are becoming coherent
(singular) through appreciation and through a focus on larger
purposes.
Several
individual 'conceptualization" are being synthesized into a 'BCM
business" layer.
Having said
that, our industry fails to move from high level conceptualizations to
implementation. The substance of all of the individual
conceptualization, and the substance of the merged conceptualization is
not 'actionable" as yet.
This is what
BCM is all about.
Along the way,
we should be able to find precisely where the OsEra makes a contribution
and where that may be some evolution pathway interesting to OMG (Object
Management Group).
Many in this
forum have come to understand my critic of FEA (federal
enterprise architecture) as being too focused on what IT vendors are
comfortable with and not focused on taking several steps towards the
BCM notion of choice points (contracts between humans (at the
conceptual layer) that often radically simplify what the technology has
to do).
This
simplification (if demonstrated) is where the huge value proposition is
at. !!!!!!
An example,
just to be specific, is in the SOA notions of 'web service discovery"
and 'web service orchestration".
What about
'service discovery" and 'process orchestration" without the 'web"
adjective?
Humans do
‘service discovery" and 'process orchestration" sometimes in a
masterful way, and sometimes very poorly. But in the general
case, no computer program comes close to the synthesis that is required
to create / discover what needs to be done.
Perhaps this
is why government response to Katrina was as it
was.