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

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

John.

+1

You said this much better than I!

Thanks, DW.

p.s. I'll avoid car metaphors in future!!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yunker, John" <yunker@amazon.com>
To: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>; "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 11:17 AM
Subject: RE: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)


Joe, You are right that the process layer depends on the services layer for
execution (and the services layer depends on the process layer for
coordination).  I guess that David's point is that the ebXML effort was
extremely focused on evaluating how the service and process layers work
together in an extensible manner -> what capabilities are necessary in the
service layer and process layer.

The electronic business services oriented architecture (ebSOA) is not a
"services architecture" (read services layer architecture), but instead the
electronic business architecture focused on the use of services as a means
to extensible and decoupled standard business practices (read business
process execution).

In that regard, I need to agree with David that BPM has been part of the
electronic business architecture (including service oriented
implementations) for a long time.

I completely recognize and agree with focusing both inside and outside the
ebXML framework, and agree that getting visibility to the importance of BPM
in the stack is essential to success.

Looking forward to working with you,

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 7:48 AM
To: David RR Webber
Cc: ebSOA; Monica J. Martin
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