[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Diagram
Duane: It is not the interaction that results in a real world effect. It is the use of the capability that does. Also I don't think its quite accurate to say that the link between interaction and service is exchange. You interact with a service by exchanging information. The execution context includes *everything* needed to support interaction. It is not right to say that visibility = policy+service+description (as implied by the nesting. We currently state that visibility=awareness+willingness+reachability. Frank P.S. I gave a talk about the RM to OMG yesterday. Went down very well. People like the simplicity. P.P.S. Concept maps are very flexible. That is both an advantage and a risk :) Of course, what is not captured is how the RWE™ itself is modeled... On Dec 7, 2005, at 10:13 AM, Duane Nickull wrote: > See new revision. > > Answering your and Wes's comments, I have realized I made a gross > inconsistent decision in the graph. If Service description points at > Functionality, then Wes is right and it should also point at policy. > For simplistic sake, I would like to recommend we remove the binary > association between service description and functionality and state in > accompanying text that if the service description describes aspects of > the service, the functionality represented by the service, along with > the policy MAY be described along with other aspects of a service. > > In keeping with the concept of managed transparency, it would be > best to > keep this as a MAY IMO. > > KISS! > > Duane > > ******************************* > Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com > Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT http://www.uncefact.org/ > Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee > Personal Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/ > ******************************* > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org] > Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:00 AM > To: Duane Nickull; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Diagram > > Duane, > > In general, I like the diagram but have a few suggested mods: > > 1. "Capability Metadata" (not included in current diagram) describes > a Capability, Service Description just describes the > Service. However, as seems appropriate to the service provider, the > Service Description can point to and otherwise reference the > Capability Metadata if that is useful in describing the Service. > > 2. More appropriate to say Service accesses Capability rather than > represents. > > A version hacked in Powerpoint is attached. > > Ken > > At 12:24 PM 12/6/2005, Duane Nickull wrote: >> I tried to spin the puzzle diagram into a pseudo layered stack. >> >> D >> >> ******************************* >> Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com >> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT http://www.uncefact.org/ >> Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee >> Personal Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/ >> ******************************* >> >> > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > --------- > / Ken > Laskey > \ > | MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 | > | 7515 Colshire Drive fax: > 703-983-1379 | > \ McLean VA 22102-7508 > / > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ---------- > <SOA-RM-Model-August2005.png>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]