Re: [soa-rm-ra] Re: Further Note on Mediator

[James Odell <email@jamesodell.com>]

Title: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Re: Further Note on Mediator

Again, the emphasis that I am accustomed to using is:
“A Mediator can be thought of as a service that offers functionalities that controls/manages collaboration/interactions and act as an intermediary between entities.”  That is, the emphasis is that it is an intermediary that controls/manages interactions among entities.
This offers a wide variety of interpretations, I know.  Can a “service mediator” fit into this definition? 
Am only offering the basic position of the agent-based world — which as borrowed from the human-based world in practice.  
Other terms I have seen include “intermediary” and “broker.”

Just my two Kopeks.

-Jim


On 12/17/10 11:13 AM, "Rex Brooks" indited:

>    I absolutely support "service registry/repository = service mediator."
>  
>  The difference between the camps as far as i can see is that I'm happy to allow more restrictive examples while Michael, Boris and Jim prefer to disallow the flexibility I require in this example. 
>  
>  
>  Cheers,
>  Rex
>  
>  On 12/16/10 12:11 PM, mpoulin@usa.com wrote: 
> > I may be mistaken but this discussion started not because of the definition of  Service Mediator in Section 3 but because service registry/repository was recognised as service mediator. As I understand, Boris and me and, probably Jim believe that service registry/repository is not and may not be a service mediator. If the definition of  Service Mediator in Section 3 allows "service registry/repository =  service mediator", then this definition is incorrect. Are we going to go 'live' with such definition is another question. 
> >
> >  
> >  
> > - Michael
> >