Re: [soa-rm] New Name of Current Spec (Was RE: [soa-rm] Groups - SOA RM Meeting Minutes June 01, 2005 (Meeting Minutes June 01, 2005[1].doc) uploaded)

[Francis McCabe <fgm@fla.fujitsu.com>]

Joe:
  I think that you misread the result of the call yesterday.
  I also think that it is less than productive to focus on the idea  
of there being two 'camps'.
  I have had a fair amount of experience in participating in  
standards activities. One thing that has been driven home to me many  
times is that no one person has 'the whole picture' when they go in  
to a process. Anyone who feels otherwise (i.e., that they know  
everything and it is up to the rest to catch up and agree) is just  
naive.
  There is often a significant amount of mutual education in a group  
like ours: of people being educated about a topic that they thought  
they already knew. In this particular case, there is (IMO) a genuine  
difficulty about the nature of a reference model. There is also some  
inevitable to-ing and fro-ing over the scope.
  I suggest that we trust the process and work towards a single  
understanding of what we are trying to do.

Frank

On Jun 2, 2005, at 6:32 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote:

> Thanks Sally. My impression was that near the end of yesterday's  
> call, the TC reached consensus (not consensus by vote, but rather  
> verbal consensus with no dissenting opinions expressed) that our  
> current Figure 2-1 really represents a service orientation  
> reference model. Furthermore, for some that was all we needed -  
> while others felt that we needed more (i.e. there was not consensus  
> on this point, nor do I expect that there would be given the 2  
> "camps" that have formed). In my opinion, all viewpoints are valid  
> for those that hold them - we just need a mechanism to reflect the  
> consensus of the TC in our work.
>
> So to this end, we decided that the best approach forward was to  
> construct the 2 reference models described in my first paragraph  
> below (2 e-mails down), the second one building on the first. This  
> would also allow us to keep the name of the TC as the SOA-RM TC,  
> and not change it to the SO-RM (Service Orientation RM) TC, because  
> we will ultimately produce a SOA RM.
>
> Speaking personally, I believe that this is an excellent approach -  
> i.e. first building a foundation (service orientation), then  
> expanding on it for SOA. The intent of my "pulse check" proposal  
> was to raise awareness that there were indeed 2 camps within the TC  
> (and I will assert that it was this way from the very start), which  
> it did.
>
> And so here we are.
>
> Joe
>
> Joseph Chiusano
> Booz Allen Hamilton
> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
>
>
> From: Sally St. Amand [mailto:sallystamand@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 8:54 AM
> To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] New Name of Current Spec (Was RE: [soa-rm]  
> Groups - SOA RM Meeting Minutes June 01, 2005 (Meeting Minutes June  
> 01, 2005[1].doc)   uploaded)
>
> Joe
> I had to leave the call a bit early so I may have missed a point.  
> But right before I left Rebekah made, I thought, the point that the  
> TC does not have concensus and we should focus on gaining concensus  
> around concepts rather than methods of graphical display or names.
> I do not believe we have concensus on concepts which is why I voted  
> 'yes' on your ballot proposal. I believe we need more discussion to  
> achieve concensus only then should we adopt a formal means to  
> display it or name it.
> Your efforts to give the discussion momentum are appreciated.
> Sally
>
> Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com> wrote:
> Just to clarify, based on our discussion at the end of today's call:
>
> Our current spec will be renamed to SO-RM (Service Orientation  
> Reference
> Model), and another will follow called SOA-RM (Service-Oriented
> Architecture Reference Model) which will extend the SO-RM spec.
>
> And perhaps after that (within our TC, or perhaps within a  
> different TC)
> we can have a POA-RM (Process-Oriented Architecture Reference Model),
> which will extend the SOA-RM spec.
>
> Joe
>
> Joseph Chiusano
> Booz Allen Hamilton
> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cbashioum@mitre.org [mailto:cbashioum@mitre.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:45 PM
> > To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: [soa-rm] Groups - SOA RM Meeting Minutes June 01,
> > 2005 (Meeting Minutes June 01, 2005[1].do! c) uploaded
> >
> > The document named SOA RM Meeting Minutes June 01, 2005
> > (Meeting Minutes June 01, 2005[1].doc) has been submitted by
> > Mr Christopher Bashioum to the OASIS SOA Reference Model TC
> > document repository.
> >
> > Document Description:
> > Minutes for the Bi-Weekly teleconferenece call.
> >
> > View Document Details:
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm/document.p
> > hp?document_id=12909
> >
> > Download Document:
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm/download.p
> > hp/12909/Meeting%20Minutes%20June%2001%2C%202005%5B1%5D.doc
> >
> >
> > PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your
> > email application may be breaking the link into two pieces.
> > You may be able to copy and paste the entire link address
> > into the address field of your web browser.
> >
> > -OASIS Open Administration
> >