Re: [soa-rm-ra] Views and viewpoints

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Hi Frank, All,

Hmmnnn. I won't quote you, but I'm using it in this space in real 
world activities aimed at genuine RWE in that I'm using it to model, 
then simulate and test for accuracy/choreography/orchestration, then 
simulate and test at scale and if that works, it goes operational. I 
don't think it makes a lot of sense to separate these activities.

I would rather see it framed as a continuum than a set of discrete 
activities. I don't mind having different "views" into the process, 
capable of testing the assumptions and requirements of services 
(reliable messaging, e.g. messages sent and received by appropriate 
parties) or business (e.g. correct, legally compliant sequence of 
message content/payloads/triggers).

However, I don't think it is wise to imply, and perhaps encourage the 
adoption of architectures, that take continuous developmental 
activities aimed to be put into orchestrated rules-based production 
and casts them as separate or separable, discrete, standalone 
activities. If this is not the case, then please disregard this 
comment.

Sorry, I haven't had the time recently to keep up. I hope to change 
that soon. Or else step away entirely for a while.

Ciao,
Rex

At 10:07 PM -0700 9/24/06, Francis McCabe wrote:
>I feel that a key concept for the service as business viewpoint is 
>the RWE. But, BPM is also important.
>
>It is an interesting question about what happens to the 
>relationships between services.
>
>For the service view, I would agree that it does seem to mean 
>orchestration/choreography.
>
>For the business view, I think it means also modeling any 
>dependencies between services (a falafel delivery service has no 
>business justification if the falafels have not been paid for.)
>
BPMN is being used now for modeling business processes. So, it would 
be a good choice in principle. It is not what I would have liked to 
have seen in this space. (Do not quote me...)

>BPMN is currently mostly about orchestration. There is some plan to 
>include choreographic aspects also.
>
>But, it has no handle on the RWE of services.
>
>Frank
>
>On Sep 24, 2006, at 9:51 PM, Danny Thornton wrote:
>
>>I'm looking at the RA from a business process
>>perspective and wondering how "Relationship Between
>>Services" changes for the new views/models.  Does this
>>section become the Service Composition and
>>Choreography model under the Service view?
>>
>>There is also the Business Processes model under the
>>Service as Business view that we currently do not have
>>defined in the RA.  If I want to relate an
>>implementation that uses Business Process Modeling
>>Notation (BPMN) to the SOA RA, I think this would be
>>extensions of the Service Composition and Choreography
>>model and the Business Processes model.  Any thoughts?
>>
>>Danny
>>
>>--- Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>We had a discussion about formalizing a views and
>>>viewpoints in the
>>>face to face; and we had another discussion on the
>>>matter during
>>>today's telcon.
>>>
>>>In order for this approach to make sense, it is
>>>important to have the
>>>right number of views; too many and it becomes
>>>unwieldy, too few and
>>>it becomes less useful.
>>>
>>>  From this point of view (sic), we identified the
>>>following major
>>>views of the RA. The titles of these views are
>>>intended to be
>>>suggestive of the viewpoint; but are not cast in
>>>stone.
>>>
>>>ServiceAsBusiness view
>>>    "How are business needs met using SOA?" is the
>>>key question.
>>>    Models in this view would fold existing sections:
>>>
>>>    Needs and capabilities
>>>    Participants
>>>    Real World Effect
>>>    Business Processes
>>>
>>>Service view
>>>    "What are services, what support is needed and
>>>how are they
>>>realized?"
>>>    Models in this view would consist of:
>>>
>>>    Service Description
>>>    Service Visibility
>>>    Interacting with services
>>>    Service Transactions
>>>    Service Composition and Choreography
>>>
>>>Security in SOA
>>>    "How can we be assured of the safety of using
>>>services?"
>>>    Models in this view would include
>>>
>>>    Security Threats
>>>    Security policies
>>>    Trust model
>>>    Security enforcement
>>>
>>>Deployment of SOA
>>>    "What does it take to deploy SOAs?"
>>>    This view would include the models:
>>>
>>>    Management of services
>>>    Governance in SOA
>>>    Compliance
>>>    Testing models for SOAs
>>>
>>>Policies and Contracts
>>>    "How do people express constraints in an SOA
>>>context?"
>>>    In one reading, policies and contracts represents
>>>an important
>>>infrastructural element that needs to be focused on.
>>>Policies and
>>>contracts could be modeled in each of the views
>>>above, or in their
>>>own view.
>>>     Specifically, we would model
>>>
>>>    Policy and contract descriptions
>>>    Policy/contract enforcement
>>>
>>>
>>>We decided to open this discussion to the list
>>>before committing it
>>>to the WIKI. Comments would be welcome.
>>>Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>http://mail.yahoo.com


-- 
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309