[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]p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Hi Everyone, I suggest we all review the Meeting Notes and Recording from last week's session on Sept. 23, 2009. The action was pretty definite about Section 1.2. After all our discussions up to 2:56 p.m. Pacific Time on Friday, 9/25/09, per my admittedly unofficial poll <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/email/archives/200909/msg00094.html>, a thin consensus at that time favored making no mention of independent and/or composable services in the proposed additional paragraph in Section 1.2. I haven't seen sufficient change in the overall consensus to justify mention of such services. Whether we also decline to add the remainder of the additional paragraph is now unclear. Please recall that our discussion was based on Frank's reply to Ken on Jun 14, 2009 at 7:12 p.m. Pacific Time. <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/email/archives/200906/msg00012.html> To reiterate, my original pass at capturing our intent immediately following the meeting was: "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. " I would propose, after all of our discussions up to this point to amend this to: "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." I have so far consistently supported including some acceptable refinement of the first version, but, lacking that I would still prefer to have the introductory statement about the positioning of our work between Business and IT. In other words, let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. We can revisit our discussions vis a vis a proper introductory mention of how business needs drive the development of business services and how IT services development support that or exist for their own mechanical purposes after PR02 is released. The issue of composability and/or aggregation as orchestrations and choreographies could then be addressed in the way Dan suggests or however else we decide. Cheers, Rex Thornton, Danny R (IS) wrote: >  > I concur with Frank, composition or aggregation qualifications to > service make for an odd discussion in section 1.2. Section 4.3.4, > Composition of Services, addresses the topic for the RAF. The points > about aggregation/composition could be weaved into section 4.3.4. > Danny > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Francis McCabe [mailto:fmccabe@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Sunday, September 27, 2009 11:48 AM > *To:* Duane Nickull > *Cc:* Mike Poulin; James Odell; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > > I need to repeat this a little louder I guess: IT DOES NOT WORK FOR ME > > This entire discussion around composition of services is (a) > superficial and (b) beside the point in relation to the vast majority > of the RAF. If we are going to take composition more seriously, then > it MUST wait until after PR2. > > Frank > On Sep 27, 2009, at 11:38 AM, Duane Nickull wrote: > >> Works for me. >> >> >> On 9/27/09 11:30 AM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>> wrote: >> >> Yes, Duane, in general, no objections. >> >> However, do we need to define composition 'in general' in SOA RA >> or primarily with respect to services? >> >> If the letter is our intention, let me 'trim' your definition in >> this way: >> >> <<composition is a way to combine services into more complex >> ones. The components or individual services, while part of the >> whole, may exist independent of the whole.>> >> >> What do you think? >> >> – Michael >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com >> <x-msg://15/dnickull@adobe.com>> >> > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>>, "James Odell" >> <email@jamesodell.com <x-msg://15/email@jamesodell.com>>, >> "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>" >> <soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>> >> > Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> > Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:43:27 -0700 >> > >> > I am fine with it as long as we define it such as: >> > >> > composition is a way to combine services, objects or data types >> > into more complex ones. The components, while part of the whole, >> > may exist independent of the whole. >> > >> > Duane >> > >> > >> > On 9/27/09 2:35 AM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>> wrote: >> > >> > In my mind, composition facilitates reuse. >> > >> > The next question in this row is 'what is reuse?' I define service >> > reuse as the use of the service in the changed/new execution >> > context; otherwise, it is just a multiple use of the service (i.e. >> > exactly how the service was defined. This, BTW, leads to one more >> > issue (a chain of reaction): the execution context description has >> > to be a part of the Service Description, i.e. the service >> > definition for the consumers) >> > >> > - Michael >> > >> > >> > >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > From: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com >> <x-msg://15/dnickull@adobe.com>> >> > > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>>, "James Odell" >> > > <email@jamesodell.com <x-msg://15/email@jamesodell.com>>, >> "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>" >> > > <soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>> >> > > Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> > > [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:32:29 -0700 >> > > >> > > If this is the consensus, I am happy with this as long as we add a >> > > glossary term to denote that the composition does not necessarily >> > > preclude reuse (ie – independent lifecycles >> for the parts). >> > > >> > > D >> > > >> > > >> > > On 9/26/09 2:54 PM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>> wrote: >> > > >> > > I used term 'composite' only because this word has somehow become >> > > commonly used but its sense is certainly 'aggregate'. >> > > >> > > I am happy with '...independent and aggregate services...' while, >> > > IMO, 'composable' and 'independent' are not antonyms: and >> > > independent service may be composed of other services. Aggregate, >> > > in the contrast, is the service that depends on others. >> > > >> > > I remember related discussion about a year ago in one of the >> > > Telecoms; I started to use the term 'aggregate' since that time >> > > but was asked on several occasions what it meant. >> > > >> > > - Michael >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > From: "James Odell" <email@jamesodell.com >> <x-msg://15/email@jamesodell.com>> >> > > > To: "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>" >> <soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>> >> > > > Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> > > > [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and >> business] >> > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:22:54 -0400 >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Additionally in UML ³composite aggregation², the >> > > composite object has >> > > > responsibility for the existence and storage of the composed >> objects >> > > > (parts). So can a composite service be thought of as having the >> > > > responsibility for the existence and storage of the composed >> objects >> > > > (parts)? I would say yes ‹ but is this always >> true? For >> > > > example a Process >> > > > Order service could defined as a SOAservice that has >> > > responsibility for the >> > > > existence for other first class services that are composed >> (e.g., Accept >> > > > order, Fill Order, Ship Order and Close Order). Here, the >> cmpositing >> > > > service could include service orchestration, as Duane suggests. >> > > > On the other hand, Could I have a service that is a >> ³taxonomic² >> > > > aggregation. >> > > > For example, a Process Payment service may simply consist of >> > > various kinds >> > > > of first class payment services, such as Cash Payment, Credit >> > > Card Payment, >> > > > Wire Transfer payment, etc). However, one could also argue >> > > that event this >> > > > could be thought of a composite, because it the >> responsibiliy for the >> > > > existence and storage of the composed services. However, >> this may or may >> > > > not nvolve orchestration ‹ only part whole. >> > > > >> > > > -Jim Odell >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On 9/25/09 6:14 PM, "Duane Nickull" indited: >> > > > >> > > > > Via Aggregation. Aggregation is a UML pattern whereby the >> parts >> > > > > are ³used² by >> > > > > the whole. If th whole does not exist, the parts can exist >> which is >> > > > > necessary for re-use. Composition (by contrast) is a UML >> > > > pattern whereby the >> > > > > parts are ³part of² the whole, hence their >> lifecycle is tied >> > > > to the lifecycle >> > > > > of the whole. When the whole ceases to exist, so do the parts, >> > > > > hence making >> > > > > ³reuse² not possible. >> > > > > >> > > > > I think aggregation is a better term, however the press >> and others have >> > > > > already gone with ³service composition² as >> a buzzword. >> > > > Service Orchestration >> > > > > is just as good as aggregation IMO. >> > > > > >> > > > > Duane >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On 9/25/09 2:50 PM, "Lublinsky, Boris" >> > > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com >> <x-msg://15/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> If the services are not composable, then how are they better >> > > compared to >> > > > >> existing applications >> > > > >> >> > > > >> --- original message --- >> > > > >> From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starboune.com >> <x-msg://15/rexb@starboune.com>> >> > > > >> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday >> > > [was: [soa-rm-r] >> > > > >> positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> > > > >> Date: September 25, 2009 >> > > > >> Time: 4:41:26 PM >> > > > >> >> > > > >> Duane, I'm picturing you tugging on Superman's cape, while >> > > spittin' into >> > > > >> the wind, tilting at windmills and messin' with Bad Bad >> LeRoy Brown, >> > > > >> while sliding into heaven sideways, brew in hand singing, >> > > "What a Ride!" >> > > > >> >> > > > >> You're right, and so is Frank, and I definitely prefer >> "aggregate-able >> > > > >> or capable of being included in various types of >> aggregations,"... >> > > > >> >> > > > >> but I think the boat already left, folks. We don't have to >> > > catch up with >> > > > >> it nor need we catch the next one. It will go as it will. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> I personally don't have strong enough feelings about it >> to be road kill >> > > > >> for it or against it. I happen to be involved in a set of >> SOA services >> > > > >> that absolutely MUST be composable, but I am satisfied that >> > > they will be >> > > > >> regardless of how this sentence in theSOA-RAF >> introduction is worded. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> It makes it marginally easier for me to get the business >> audiences I >> > > > >> deal with to act right if "composable" services is something >> > > I can point >> > > > >> to when or if we get people insisting on something really >> dumb, like >> > > > >> "Point-to-Point" is the only distribution protocol that >> counts," or "we >> > > > >> can use the rules for RSS Feeds for all distribution." I >> > > suppose its not >> > > > >> impossible, but I don't really expect to see it. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> BTW, I don't read the sentence to ean that ALL >> independent services >> > > > >> MUST also be composable. It means " a network of >> independent services >> > > > >> and/or composable services." I think independent >> composable services is >> > > > >> almost a contradiction of erms or almost an oxymoron. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> Cheers, >> > > > >> Rex >> > > > >> >> > > > >> Duane Nickull wrote: >> > > > >>> > My take on this: >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> >> > > > >> > > >> http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/09/soa-anti-patterns-service-compositio >> > > > >>> n.html >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > D >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > On 9/25/9 1:21 PM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>> wrote: >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > I do not have any strong objections. >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > 'Composable' means to me that the service may be >> composed; the >> > > > >>> > question is - composed by what and how this corresponds to >> > > > >>> > 'independent'? 'Composite' or 'aggregate' (as Ken >> > > pointed once) is >> > > > >>> > the service, which is composed already by other >> services, which >> > > > >>> > comprises other services, i.e. it is not independent. >> > > This is what >> > > > >>> > I tried to "EmFasis" :-) >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > You, folks, decide. >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > - Michael >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>>> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > >>>> > > From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" >> <robert.ellinger@ngc.com <x-msg://15/robert.ellinger@ngc.com>> >> > > > >>>> > > To: "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com >> <x-msg://15/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>>, "Mike >> > > > >>> > Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>>, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:01:34 -0500 >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > Mike, I like the sentence. Boris, I think that >> "composable >> > > > >>> > services" is >> > > > >>>> > > the correct term. I've heard many "experts" and >> > > > "gurus" use the >> > > > term >> > > > >>>> > > and concept since at least 2003 and seems to me to >> put the >> > > > >>> > "EmFasis on >> > > > >>>> > > the rite Silobbal", as my dad would say. >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >>>> > > From: Lublinsky, Boris >> [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com] >> > > > >>>> > > Sent: Friday,September 25, 2009 3:50 PM >> > > > >>>> > > To: Mike Poulin; Ellinger, Robert S (IS); >> Lublinsky, Boris; >> > > > >>>> > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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] >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > Composable? >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >>>> > > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> > > > >>>> > > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 2:27 PM >> > > > >>>> > > To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Mike Poulin; >> Lublinsky, Boris; >> > > > >>>> > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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] >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > Bob, >> > > > >>>> > > this is the phrase: >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > 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 ... >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > I propose to say: "...a network of independent and >> composite >> > > > >>> > services, >> > > > >>>> > > machines, the..." >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > - Michael >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > >>>>> > > > From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" >> <robert.ellinger@ngc.com <x-msg://15/robert.ellinger@ngc.com>> >> > > > >>>>> > > > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>>, "Lublinsky, Boris" >> > > > >>>> > > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com >> <x-msg://15/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>>, >> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:40:28 -0500 >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > There was one sentence that you sent that I could >> > > > not make head >> > > > or >> > > > >>>> > > tail >> > > > >>>>> > > > of as I noted. Otherwise, I hought I had >> > > > incorporated all of >> > > > your >> > > > >>>>> > > > comments >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > Bob >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >>>>> > > > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> > > > >>>>> > > > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 1:31 PM >> > > > >>>>> > > > To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Mike Poulin; >> > > Lublinsky, Boris; >> > > > >>>>> > > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 am afraid, I am lost. I do not see some of the >> > > > >>>>> crucial changes >> > > > I >> > > > >>>>> > > > advocated for and you agreed to accommodate: >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must >> > > > >>>>> be understood >> > > > in >> > > > >>>>> > > > terms of its support of business services." >> > > > >>>>> > > > - MP - great! >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > "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." >> > > > >>>>> > > > - MP - my proposal: 'Business services provide >> business >> > > > >>> > functionality >> > > > >>>> > > in >> > > > >>>>> > > > pursuit of the business outcome; while IT >> > > > artifacts 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." >> > > > >>>>> > > > - MP - great! You commented: 'This doesn't make >> > > > sense to me. It >> > > > >>> > is not >> > > > >>>>> > > > cnnected to SOA in anyway' but left the >> > > statement. I am for >> > > > having >> > > > >>>> > >this >> > > > >>>>> > > > statement as it is (it is not my text but very >> > > right oe IMO) >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > "Neither Business nor IT completely own govern, >> and manage >> > > > >>> > this SOA >> > > > >>>>> > > > Ecosystem. The SOA Eosystem must accommodate >> both sets of >> > > > concerns >> > > > >>>> > > for >> > > > >>>>> > > > t fulfill its purpose and potential." >> > > > >>>>> > > > - MP - great! >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > "Business needs to drive the development of >> > > > services delivered >> > > > >>> > through >> > > > >>>>> > > > processes and its supporting IT, which provides >> > > > the capability >> > > > that >> > > > >>>>> > > > satisfies those needs. This is the business >> value of SOA." >> > > > >>>>> > > > - MP - development of services is not necessary >> delivered >> > > > through >> > > > >>>>> > > > processes and supporting IT. This is why 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.' >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > (i.e. none Business or IT , or both; SOA is in >> > > between them) >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > Thus, my variant of the text looks like this: >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must >> > > > be understood >> > > > in >> > > > >>>> > > terms >> > > > >>>>> > > > of its support of business services. Business >> > > > services provide >> > > > >>>> > > business >> > > > >>>>> > > > functionality in pursuit of the business >> outcome; while IT >> > > > >>> > artifacts >> > > > >>>>> > > > 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. Neither Business >> > > > nor IT >>>>> >> > > > completely >> > > > >>>> > > own, >> > > > >>>>> > > > govern, and manage this SOA Ecosystem. The SOA >> > > > Ecosystem must >> > > > >>>>> > > > accommodate both sets of concerns for to fulfill >> > > > >>>>> its purpose and >> > > > >>>>> > > > potential. Business needs to drive the >> > > > development of services, >> > > > >>> > which >> > > > >>>>> > > > provides the capability that satisfies those >> > > > needs. This is the >> > > > >>>> > > business >> > > > >>>>> > > > value of SOA. >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > - Michael >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" >> > > <robert.ellinger@ngc.com <x-msg://15/robert.ellinger@ngc.com>> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>>, "Lublinsky, Boris" >> > > > >>>>> > > > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com >> <x-msg://15/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>>, >> > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:56:23 -0500 >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Try this. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Bob >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:31 AM >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > To: Lublinsky, Boris; Mike Poulin; >> > > > >>>>>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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] >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Boris has reminded me one thing: in the >> > > > paragraph following >> > > > >>> > the two >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > paragraphs we are discussing now we say >> > > > something like 'SOA >> > > > is a >> > > > >>>>> > > > network >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > of independent services...' I would modify >> > > > this phrase a bit >> > > > >>> > saying >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > something like 'SOA is a network of independent >> > > > >>>>>> and composite >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > services...' >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Sorry, I did not mention this earlier. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > This is all what I wanted to say about SOA >> and Buz. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > - Michael >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > From: "Lublinsky, Boris" >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > To: "Mike Poulin" , >> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:04:35 -0500 >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > I tend to agree with Mike/jeff >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > See below >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:15 AM >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > B.L. Moreover, as I re read the text I am >> > > > realizing more and >> > > > more >> > > > >>>> > > that >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > this is not so much about SOA but mostly about >> > > > ESB. I am of >> > > > >>> > course >> > > > >>>>> > > > over >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > simplifying, but hopefully you got the jest. >> > > > We managed to >> > > > >>> > leap frog >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > business architecture and servicizing the >> > > > >>>>>> enterprise and jump >> > > > >>>> > > directly >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > into the issues of service interaction - >> > > > ecosystem. This is >> > > > fine, >> > > > >>>> > > but >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > who is going to live in this wonderful ecosystem. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > B.L. Fair enough. Lets create the door, but >> > > > may be, just may >> > > > >>> > be open >> > > > >>>>> > > > it >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > up slightly for the next review. This is why >> > > I think, the >> > > > >>> > text under >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > discussion, does not belong in the >> > > ecosystem, but rather >> > > > >>> > above it. >> > > > >>>> > > We >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > talk about business/IT alignment and then >> > > > define ecosystem >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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: >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > < >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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.>> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > B.L. See comment above >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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: >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > < >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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.>> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > B.L. How about: >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > << SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly >> > > > Business, but is of >> > > > both >> > > > >>>>> > > > worlds. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > Without involvement of the business, defining >> service >> > > > >>> > functionality >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > based on the enterprise business model and >> > > > aligned with the >> > > > >>>> > > enterprise >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > business processes, SOA can't fulfill the >> promise of >> > > > business/IT >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > alignment and support for flexible, >> process-driven >> > > > enterprise. >> > > > >>>> > > Without >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > involvement of IT, implementing SOA >> > > ecosystem, supporting >> > > > >>> > flexible >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > service deployment, interactions, monitoring >> > > > and management >> > > > SOA >> > > > >>>> > > can't >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > fulfill the promise of scalable, maintainable >> IT.>> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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)" To: "Mike >> Poulin" , >> > > > "Lublinsky, >> > > > >>>>> > > > Boris" >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > , rexb@starbourne.com >> <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com> >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , >> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com> >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>> > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com> >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>, >> > > > >>>> > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com>; >> > > > >>> > Lublinsky, Boris >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>> > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 >> <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com>; Lublinsky, Boris >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>> > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; > > >> > > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 >> <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com> >> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>>> > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 >> <x-msg://15/rexb@starbourne.com> >> > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com>; >> > > > >>>> > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com> >> > > > [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> > > > Sent: > >> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>> > Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:31 AM >> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> To: >> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 >> <x-msg://15/mpoulin@usa.com> To: >> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> <x-msg://15/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 >> <x-msg://15/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! >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >> treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5% >> <http://treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5%> >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > 20> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > -- >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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. >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 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% >> <http://treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5%> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > 20> >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > << bus and tech 2.doc >> >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > -- >> > > > >>>>> > > > An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> > > > >>>>> > > > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>>>> > > > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > >>>>> > > > 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! >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>>> > > 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. >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>>> > > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > -- >> > > > >>> > An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> > > > >>> > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > >>> > 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 >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > -- >> > > > >>> > Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle >> Bundle - >> > > > >>> > http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE >> > > > >>> > Twitter: duancechaos >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> -- >> > > > >> 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! >> > > >> > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > 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 >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle Bundle - >> > > http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE >> > > Twitter: duancechaos >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle Bundle - >> > http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE >> > Twitter: duancechaos >> > >> >> > >> >> >> -- >> An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> >> >> >> -- >> Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle Bundle - >> _http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE >> _Twitter: duancechaos >> > -- 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]