RE: [ebsoa] Clarification on Patterns

[Matthew MacKenzie <mattm@adobe.com>]

BPSS isn't a pattern language in the sense of what we are trying to
accomplish.  We need a common format, or approach, to specifying a pattern.
-matt

-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:16 AM
To: Chiusano Joseph; ebSOA
Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Clarification on Patterns

Joe,

I would concur and humbly submit that the best pattern language
we have right now for our purposes may well be BPSS - in
creating patterns of eb processes that the SOA then 
implements.

In the whole arena of BPM there is much work on patterns
of course - and right now I'm re-visiting some old "friends"
in terms of the activity diagrams and process flow 
description work that was done by the Prolog community
that pre-dates pi-calculus - but for certain mission 
profiles provide an excellent fit.  Horses for courses
though - and with all the work on legal business process
interactions that underpins the BPSS model - its hard
to find a better pattern system for the eb domain IMO.

DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
To: "ebSOA" <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 9:09 AM
Subject: [ebsoa] Clarification on Patterns


> I'm taking a step back and re-examining our discussions on patterns that
> have occurred over the past several weeks, and have some questions
> please:
> 
> (1) I know we've said that we've decided that we would create a pattern
> language - is that what we *really* want? Is it too low-level (i.e.
> toward assembly language) for the purposes of this TC? Patterns can be
> conveyed without the use of a pattern language, as IBM does in their SOA
> Patterns redbook.
> 
> (2) What are some examples of existing pattern languages? I did not see
> any glaring references in any of the e-mail threads.
> 
> Thanks,
> Joe
> -- 
> Kind Regards,
> Joseph Chiusano
> Associate
> Booz | Allen | Hamilton
>