Re: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

Thanks David - I value your viewpoints (as always). My view of this may
very well change in the course of our efforts, more toward the view that
you present below. I look forward to this possibility.

Ok, now I've got this funny image of my Grandma in my mind. That should
keep me from thinking about SOAs all day. ;)

Joe

David RR Webber wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> This seems to be a very limited view of SOA as just
> messaging middleware and nothing else.
> 
> Now while some vendors may want to sell that -
> because that is all they have in their implementation
> stack - I've always viewed SOA as containing the
> means to direct and manage message interactions -
> and whether you call that workflow, message flow
> or process flow - its definately all part of the BPM
> box IMHO.
> 
> And - critically - as soon as you apply collaboration
> profiles to the messaging arena - you have to have
> some kind of collaboration description - to make
> agreement to - and to have the software check
> compliance with - manage state of - direct
> requests and responses - this all requires knowledge
> of the BPM steps and definition.
> 
> The separation into layers as you describe is the diagram
> #18  from the PPT - but just because you have these
> layers does NOT mean that the BPM is not an
> intrinsic part of the SOA.  The layer metaphor is
> just a convenience to aid understanding for humans.
> 
> Like explaining to your Grandma how the steering
> wheel directs the wheels of the car - but the steering
> wheel is inside the car in reality - not sticking out from the
> roof!!
> 
> So products like BEA, iWay, MQSeries et al
> all have the process control stuff deeply embedded
> into the menus and setup of the messaging not to
> mention the inner working of the messaging engine
> itself already.
> 
> DW.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
> To: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>
> Cc: "ebSOA" <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Monica J. Martin"
> <monica.martin@sun.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 10:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)
> 
> > David,
> >
> > I am going to respectfully disagree with you here, mostly because I am
> > looking at SOAs not only within the ebXML framework, but outside as well
> > (that is my job given my position as a consultant to the US federal
> > government). I assert that SOAs *support* the business process layer,
> > and that the business process layer therefore resides on top of the
> > services layer (at least in my view of "the stack"). So I don't advocate
> > removing anything "from where it's been all along" - in my estimation,
> > the business process layer has not ever been part of the services layer,
> > but is rather supported by it.
> >
> > Of course, I could be persuaded otherwise as our work progresses - I
> > always keep an open mind.
> >
> > Thanks for your excellent feedback.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > David RR Webber wrote:
> > >
> > > Joe,
> > >
> > > The direct answer is - of course BPM is part of the stack - are
> > > you proposing we REMOVE it from where its been all along?!?
> > >
> > > Is someone building cars without steering wheels yet?!?  Is
> > > anyone buying them?
> > >
> > > See ebXML architecture for starters - and then both JJ and my
> > > articles on SOA at ebXMLforum.com - with appropriate
> > > diagrams - not to mention slide #26 from presentation here:
> > >
> > >  http://drrw.net/presentations/ebXML%20Today%20-%20March%2004.zip
> > >
> > > Cheers, DW.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
> > > To: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>
> > > Cc: "ebSOA" <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Monica J. Martin"
> > > <monica.martin@sun.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 10:36 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)
> > >
> > > > Hmmm...I think I missed a direct answer to my question in all of this.
> > > > ;)
> > > >
> > > > Joe
> > > >
> > > > David RR Webber wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe,
> > > > >
> > > > > I just telegraphed the British Embassy and Prince Charles
> > > > > is going to have a word with his mother for us.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nice to have this hot line.  Clearly will greatly help us
> > > > > fend off imposters and claimants trying to usurp our
> > > > > position as the authorities on ebSOA.
> > > > >
> > > > > You may also want to check out JJs article
> > > > > at http://www.ebXMLforum.com  where he diagrams same.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers, DW.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
> > > > > To: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>
> > > > > Cc: "ebSOA" <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Monica J. Martin"
> > > > > <monica.martin@sun.com>
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 10:21 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)
> > > > >
> > > > > > David RR Webber wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Joe,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I humbly submit this is a redherring.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Service Oriented IMHO already implies Process by extension  -
> since
> > > > > > > behind the delivery of any service there must be a process
> > > > > > > controlling and facilitating it.   Tha'ts why BPSS and BPEL are
> part
> > > > > > > of the SOA stack.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks David - but according to whom are they part of the SOA
> stack?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Joe
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We need another acronym like a hole in the head - let's leave
> that
> > > > > > > stuff to the professionals at Gartner to dream up, eh?  ; -)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers, DW.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
> > > > > > > To: "ebSOA" <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > > > > > > Cc: "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 9:30 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I know that our concentration is to be service-oriented
> > > architectures,
> > > > > > > > but at the same time I'm thinking about what will lie beyond
> (so
> > > that
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > > can best prepare). A term popped into my head on the way home
> > > > > yesterday
> > > > > > > > (the DC Beltway apparatentely inspires me): Process-Oriented
> > > > > > > > Architecture, or "POA".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Has anyone heard this term used before? I Google'd it and
> found
> > > few
> > > > > > > > hits, all of which seemed to be individual (rather than
> corporate)
> > > > > > > > references.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As you can tell from the term, just as SOAs enable (involve,
> pick
> > > your
> > > > > > > > favorite word here) the use of shared services, POAs will
> extend
> > > SOAs
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > enable the use of shared Web Services-based processes that are
> > > based
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > > shared Web Services that are defined within SOAs, working in
> > > concert
> > > > > > > > with each other. So for a US federal application (my primary
> > > client),
> > > > > > > > this could mean a set of shared Web Services-based business
> > > processes
> > > > > > > > for federal agencies, in a flexible, agile, process
> environment.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does this concept resound with anyone?
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > > > Joseph Chiusano
> > > > > > > > Associate
> > > > > > > > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > Joseph Chiusano
> > > > > > Associate
> > > > > > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > Joseph Chiusano
> > > > Associate
> > > > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > Kind Regards,
> > Joseph Chiusano
> > Associate
> > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> >

-- 
Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz | Allen | Hamilton