[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra]positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
I can support Mike's suggestions. Cheers, Rex Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote: > Hi: > > First, I dislike any standard that is ambiguous--It's the PhD. > researcher/engineer/systems engineer/system architect in me. That's the > reason I worked at clarification. I think we do a disservice to SOA and > its users by not stating (or at least implying) that the causal linkage > of the technical to the business will greatly increase the value of > migrating to SOA, while focusing on the technical in of itself runs the > risk of W3S (the Wild West of Web Services) and catastrophic failure. > > Second, I have little disagreement with your proposed changes/revisions, > however. So I will incorporate your recommendations to see how it reads. > > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 6:15 AM > To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > Importance: High > > I believe service orientation has the enormous potential to become the > basic business operational model and SOA will be the basis of the > Business Architecture. > > Since we do not have time for this discussion now, let's return to our > text. > > The only thing I hope to set in the RA standard is an open door to the > Business opportunity of SOA instead of locking it in IT. > > This means I vote for enough 'ambiguity' in the text that would allow > anybody to go with SOA in both - technical and business - directions, if > needed. > > The following is my modifications to the text that together aim only one > statement: "SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both > worlds." Particularly: > > a) I agree in full with: > <<SOA systems cannot be understood by a simple decomposition into IT > components and subsystems. They must be understood within their context > or environment; particularly, when there are many interactions among the > parts. For example, a biological ecosystem is a self-sustaining > association of plants, animals, and the physical environment in which > they live. Understanding an ecosystem often requires this holistic > perspective of the system and its environment rather than one focusing > on the system's individual parts.>> > > b) I DISagree with << The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must > be understood in terms of its support of business services, which is its > environment.>> > My proposal is this: > << The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in > terms of its support of business services.>> > > c) I DISagree with << Business services provide business functionality > in pursuit of the business outcome; while SOA services provide IT > artifacts that facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize > and support the business services. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT > nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds. >> > My proposal is this: > <<SOA absorbs business functionality, in pursuit of the business > outcome, together with its technical realization and support provided by > Information Technology. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly > Business, but is of both worlds.>> > > d) I DISagree with << Business needs drive the development of services > delivered through IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those > needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> > My proposal is: > << Business needs to drive the development of services, which provides > the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of > SOA.>> > or > << Business needs to drive the development of services delivered through > Business and IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those > needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> > > > Regards, > - Michael > > > > > > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >> To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "Lublinsky, Boris" >> > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>, rexb@starbourne.com > >> Cc: "Laskey, Ken" <klaskey@mitre.org>, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > >> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:30:41 -0500 >> >> >> Mike: >> >> >> >> We are trying to get to the same concept, but really what is being >> discussed is a cultural paradigm shift. In my view, the execution >> context is the technical context within which the service components >> exist and within in which they are executed as enablers and support >> > for > >> the process. The service components are the parts and subassemblies. >> The process flow, which is part of the execution context, as defined >> > by > >> the orchestration or choreography (both of which have business rules >> engines to ensure that policies/standards/business rules/etc. are >> followed). >> >> >> >> Business process modeling as instantiated by the assembled of the SOA >> service components, with the associated business rule, links the >> > system > >> to the business processes. Provided that the business processes serve >> the goals or objectives or the business (that is provides value to the >> business) then the tools as instantiated in the SOA service multiplies >> the effectiveness of the process. >> >> >> >> The cultural shift involves the fact that when business challenges or >> opportunities arise, the business processes and SOA supporting >> > services > >> can meet those challenge because SOA enable agile systems. I define >> agility as "successful response to unexpected challenges and >> opportunities." BTW, this is the definition of the Agility Forum >> > (circa > >> 1990) associated with Lehigh University (that is Nagel and his group >> that wrote the book on the agile enterprise). Currently, the >> > monolithic > >> architecture of most ERP-like systems do not allow agility, while >> functional architecture place emphasis on optimizing for the function; >> creating silos. There is an axiom in Systems Engineering that >> optimizing the subsystems, sub-optimizes the system. SOA enables both >> optimization and agility of the system, but requires mapping of the >> system to the organization's processes as the price >> >> >> >> I could and have said a great deal more, but I think that is enough. >> The linkage is there for anyone to get the maximum value out of the >> > SOA > >> and both the business processes and the composite applications >> > (process > >> assembled service components???) or whatever operating in the >> > execution > >> context, must enable and support the processes. As the processes >> > change > >> in response to challenges and opportunities, both the processes and >> > the > >> composite application must respond quickly and successfully. This is >> not the way it is done now, and that is the cultural change that is >> needed. >> >> >> >> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 7:18 PM >> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Lublinsky, Boris; rexb@starbourne.com >> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> >> >> >> Robert, >> >> as we know SOA defines Execution Context. Since we never defined what >> > it > >> includes, I suggest (and promote this opinion) that EC includes >> > Business > >> EC and Technical EC. Business services cannot be 'the environment of >> > the > >> SOA Ecosystem' because it is included into SOA. Business EC defines >> business execution policies and Technical EC defines technical >> > execution > >> policies. SOA Ecosystem comprises both business and technical realms. >> >> Phrase "while SOA services provide IT artifacts that facilitate >> connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business >> services."" has a problem because SOA service does not necessary >> "facilitate connectivity of functional units". For instance,a >> self-contained stand-alone business technical service realises its own >> business function or feature w/o joining with other "functional >> > units". > >> Plus, SOA Service may or may not contain any IT artefacts. Time when >> > SOA > >> was considered a pure technical thing is gone (and for good). >> >> I agree with you on "The value of IT is the same as any other tool". >> This is why I think that statement " Business needs drive the >> development of services delivered through IT, which provides the >> capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of >> SOA" requires corrections. Development of services is not necessary >> delivered through IT, it may be purely manual business service and >> > many > >> services of such nature exist. >> >> Based on my discussion in several Business Architecture groups on the >> Web, any business process in Business may be defined as business >> > service > >> with or without technical component. Implementation of the business >> service, as we know, is not that important for service-oriented >> Architecture. >> >> If we state that SOA positions BETWEEN Business and IT, we MAY NOT >> attribute it to IT only and confront it with the business service. >> > This > >> is illogical. >> >> - Michael >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" >> To: "Lublinsky, Boris" , rexb@starbourne.com >> Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , mpoulin@usa.com, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:19:49 -0500 >> >> >> See below >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:58 AM >> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris >> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> >> I have no idea what this means: >> >> "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in >> terms of its support of business services, which is its environment." >> >> What is which environment? >> Business services are the environment of the SOA Ecosystem. >> >> Also: >> " Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of >> business outcome; while SOA services provide IT artifacts that >> facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the >> business services." >> >> SOA services is a complete misnomer. Infrastructure I can buy, but SOA >> services? >> I disagree with that. The infrastructure provides nothing except an >> operating context. Only when SOA Service (which in my understanding is >> a composite application with contractual obligations) provide any >> > value > >> to the customer. >> >> And finally: >> " Business needs drive the development of services delivered through >> > IT, > >> which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the >> business value of SOA." >> >> This has several problems: >> 1. Business is concerned only with business services and drives their >> design, not development 2. What is the business value? What does this >> points to? >> >> My understanding of the term development is that it includes design, >> > but > >> if you want to change it...The value of IT is the same as any other >> tool, to multiple the value of the process. >> Adam Smith pointed this out in Chapter 1 of Book 1 of the Wealth of >> Nations. This is a point lost on IT as this comment demonstrates. >> >> I think we are digressing. >> >> I hope not. >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:46 AM >> To: rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris >> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> >> Hi: >> >> Please try this edit. >> >> Bob >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:34 AM >> To: Lublinsky, Boris >> Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; >> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> >> Very minor grammar correction, Boris, >> >> I'm just a nit picker. >> >> ;) >> Rex >> >> Lublinsky, Boris wrote: >> >>> I haven't seen people discussing my grammar so much lately. I am >>> > doing > >>> something wrong sorry. >>> I am fine with managing >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:07 AM >>> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) >>> Cc: Lublinsky, Boris; Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; >>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>> >>> Hi Folks, >>> >>> I'm being technically challenged at the moment with remote >>> >> participation >> >>> in overlapping meetings the latter of which isn't starting and >>> the former of which appears to have ended early while I dropped >>> off to attend the latter.Sheseh! >>> >>> Here's how I would correct Boris's grammar with one >>> > word-substitution: > >>> I >>> >>> don't want the concept of "orchestration" being confused with the >>> > use > >> of >> >>> "orchestrating" so I am changing that to "managing" which we don't >>> >> spend >> >>> much attention on in the RAF yet .(I just want to avoid anyone >>> > asking > >> if >> >>> we mean that "all business services must be delivered via >>> orchestration."): >>> >>> Business drives the definition of business services aligned with >>> enterprise business functionality and business processes, >>> managing execution of these services, while IT defines >>> infrastructure services, >>> >>> providing support across a wide range of business services and >>> implements both types of services. Such collaboration allows >>> stronger communications between both, by creating one-to-one >>> mapping between business and IT artifacts. >>> >>> Regardless, since it is clear that Bob did not actually pick up >>> Boris's additions and so didn't drop them, and Ken had one more >>> addition he was considering, could we ask Ken to correct Boris's >>> grammar, fold in Bob's slight rewording and add his piece? Then, >>> perhaps Jeff and/or Jim could make the crisp differentiation >>> between business services and SOA services or between business >>> services and IT >>> >>> services >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Rex >>> >>> Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Didn't intend to drop Boris's additions...must of missed them. I >>>> thought we were to start from where you left off, so that is >>>> what I >>>> >>>> >>> did. >>> >>> >>>> Sorry Boris...Perhaps we were working concurrently and the material >>>> >> crossed. >> >>>> Bob >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:10 AM >>>> To: Lublinsky, Boris >>>> Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; >>>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>> >>>> My task was to get the work rolling. I have minor quibbles with >>>> >>>> >>> correct >>> >>> >>>> English grammar in Boris's additions, and I agree with Jeff that >>>> the distinction between "business service' and "SOA service" >>>> needs to be made. In general I think simpler is better, but as >>>> long as the grammar is corrected, I'd be fine with Boris's >>>> additions. I don't have any problems with Bob's minor rewording, >>>> but i don't see why he dropped Boris's additions.. >>>> >>>> I'll look at it again in the morning. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Rex >>>> >>>> Lublinsky, Boris wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> You through away all changes that were suggested after this >>>>> > initial > >>>>> >>>> one? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:41 PM >>>>> To: rexb@starbourne.com >>>>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>>> >>>>> I'd recommend some minor rewording... -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:16 PM >>>>> To: rexb@starbourne.com >>>>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>>> >>>>> First pass at the Section 1.2 as an additional paragraph after >>>>> the first paragraph. I include the first paragraph and the >>>>> start of the current second paragraph here for the context: >>>>> >>>>> 1.2 Service Oriented Archtecture - An Ecosystem Perspective >>>>> >>>>> Many systems cannot be understood by a simple decomposition into >>>>> >>>>> >>> parts >>> >>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> and subsystems -- in particular when there are many >>>>> interactions between the parts. For example, a biological >>>>> ecosystem is a self-sustaining association of plants, animals, >>>>> and the hysical environment in which they live. Undestanding an >>>>> ecosystem often requires a holistic perspective rather than one >>>>> focusing on the >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> system's individual parts. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the >>>>> boundary between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor >>>>> wholly Business, >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> but is of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, >>>>> >> govern >> >>> >>>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns must be >>>>> accommodated for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes. >>>>> Business >>>>> >>>>> needs drive the development of services delivered through IT, >>>>> providing the capability that satisfies those needs. This is >>>>> the business value of SOA. >>>>> >>>>> From a holistic perspective, a SOA-based system is a network of >>>>> independent services, machines, the people who operate, affect, >>>>> use and govern those services as well as ... >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Rex >>>>> >>>>> Rex Brooks wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Ken, Everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe that the email you are looking for is your reply to >>>>>> >> Frank: >> >>> >>> > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/email/archives > >>>>>> / >>>>>> 200906/msg00012.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is what Frank Wrote Jun 14, 2009, at 7:12 PM: >>>>>> >>>>>> "I sympathize with the sentiment behind this. We have >>>>>> consistently identified SOA as being at the boundary between >>>>>> business and IT. It >>>>>> >>>>>> is >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> neither wholly IT nor wholly business but is of both worlds. >>>>>> >>>>>> That represents potentially one of SOA's greatest opportunities; >>>>>> >> and >> >>> >>>>>> the source of its weaknesses: neither business nor IT can >>>>>> >> completely >> >>> >>>>>> own/grok SOA. >>>>>> >>>>>> Frank" >>>>>> >>>>>> The email referenced above contains the most or all of the thread >>>>>> >> "Are >> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> we being ignored?" >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not sure we would help ourselves if we say more than "The >>>>>> SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the boundary >>>>>> between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor wholly >>>>>> Business, but is >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern >>>>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns MUST be >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> accommodated >>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes." >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Rex >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Laskey, Ken wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a reminder that this week we are scheduled to discuss >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> adding >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> the text on the overlap of SOA and business. Below is text >>>>>>> >> suggested >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> by Michael Poulin and there is another email from Boris with a >>>>>>> > lot > >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> idea that would need to be condensed and >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> added/substituted/combined. >>> >>> >>>>>>> Let's get the discussion far enough along that we can bring this >>>>>>> >> to >> >>> >>>>>>> (close to) closure by the end of Wednesday's call. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I remember there was an email where Frank wrote something very >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> crisp >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> on this subject that I replied was exactly what we needed to >>>>>>> > say. > >>>>>>> Unfortunately, I have no idea when that email thread occurred. >>>>>>> > If > >>>>>>> someone could find it, I think it would be a good contribution >>>>>>> > to > >> the >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> discussion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Back to Mike's suggested text, two immediate things come to >>>>>>> > mind. > >>>>>>> 1. Section 1.4 is a discussion of the views and this is not a >>>>>>> > view > >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> be added as 1.4.4. I think it fits after section 1.2, possibly >>>>>>> > as > >>>>>>> another short section. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. It is not obvious to me what the phrase "the similarity of >>>>>>> the principles of the Value Networks business model" means. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ken >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dr. Kenneth Laskey >>>>>>> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 >>>>>>> 7515 Colshire Drive fax: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 703-983-1379 >>>>>>> McLean VA 22102-7508 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] Sent: >>>>>>> Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:31 AM >>>>>>> To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>>> Subject: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and >>>>>>> >> business >> >>>>>>> Hi Folks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I join Francis and Boris in suggestion that SOA RA's >>>>>>> > Introduction > >>>>>>> would benefit from adding a couple of paragraphs on the >>>>>>> business aspects of SOA positioned across Business and IT. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the previous message I composed a few words for a small >>>>>>> > section > >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> this topic and propose to discuss them as an initial draft >>>>>>> > during > >> the >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> next (or following) Telecom. Proposed text may be found in the >>>>>>> >> middle >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> of this message chain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any suggestions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: RE: todos for PR2 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org Date: 8 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> Sep >>> >>> >>>>>>> 2009 16:21:26 -0000 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business" is what I >>>>>>> >> write >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> a lot for last few months. So, let me propose a strawman for >>>>>>> > this > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> text: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> 1.4.4 Business Value of the Service Oriented Architecture >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A Service Oriented Architecture realizes principles of the >>>>>>> > concept > >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> service orientation in the sphere of architecture. The >>>>>>> >> architecture >> >>> >>>>>>> in the organisation comprises both business architecture and >>>>>>> technical architecture of the systems [ref. to TOGAF 9.0]. >>>>>>> While SOA-based systems address aspects of the technical >>>>>>> architecture, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> the >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> similarity of the principles of the Value Networks business >>>>>>> > model > >> and >> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> SOA allows us to see SOA as a conceptual bridge between >>>>>>> corporate Business and IT. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Noticed similarity opens up new possibilities for Business and >>>>>>> > IT > >>> to >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> construct service-oriented customer-centric convergent solutions >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> for >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> business problems. Service orientation enables operational >>>>>>> and technical flexibility, which contributes to business >>>>>>> efficiency the >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> great deal. The Service Orientation concept has the potential >>>>>>> not only to align IT with Business, but also to align the >>>>>>> entire >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> company >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> with the market dynamics. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If the ideas in this writing are acceptable, I will work on the >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> wording. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> - Michael Poulin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Francis McCabe To: "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org RA" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:24:08 -0700 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. As Boris alluded to, I think that a paragraph or two in >>>>>>> the introduction positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and >>>>>>> business could be very useful. It is also pretty faithful to >>>>>>> the RAF! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. The concept of interaction in the RM referred *everything* >>>>>>> involved in interacting with services. For the RA we have to >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> unpack >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> that some. This is the foundation for the multi-leveled concept >>>>>>> > of > >>> >>>>>>> joint action. This should go in Section 3.1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 3. I think that Danny's security diagram should be updated >>>>>>> and incorporated. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 4. The trust and willingness stuff should go in. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 5. It would be good if we could go through the text bolding >>>>>>> >> defined >> >>> >>>>>>> concepts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- >>>>>>> > [Date > >>>>>>> Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Rex Brooks >>>>> President, CEO >>>>> Starbourne Communications Design >>>>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94702 >>>>> Tel: 510-898-0670 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>> - To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS >>>>> TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs >>>>> in OASIS >>>>> >>>>> at: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > >>>>> The information contained in this communication may be >>>>> > CONFIDENTIAL > >>>>> >>>> and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. >>>> > If > >>>> you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that >>>> any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this >>>> communication, or any >>>> >>>> >>> of >>> >>> >>>> its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >>>> communication in error, please notify the sender and >>>> delete/destroy >>>> >>>> >>> the >>> >>> >>>> original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper >>>> >> files. >> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Rex Brooks >>>> President, CEO >>>> Starbourne Communications Design >>>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >>>> Berkeley, CA 94702 >>>> Tel: 510-898-0670 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC >>>> that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in >>>> OASIS at: >>>> >>>> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.ph > >>>> p >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Rex Brooks >> President, CEO >> Starbourne Communications Design >> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >> Berkeley, CA 94702 >> Tel: 510-898-0670 >> >> >> >> The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL >> > and > >> is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you >> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any >> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any >> > of > >> its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >> communication in error, please notify the sender and delete/destroy >> > the > >> original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper files. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> >> >> -- >> >> An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> >> > <http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;216722518;39159097;q?http://www.freecredi > > treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5% > >> 20> >> > > > > > -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-898-0670
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]