Re: [ebsoa] SOA BUP (was - Quick answers to David's questions)

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

Not that its any news - but
BPSS of course already has these models in it, and more.

DW.

Quoting Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>:

> Ann Wrightson wrote:
> > 
> > Joe,
> > 
> > You wrote:
> > 
> > For example, a methodology could start out (roughly) as:
> > 
> > (1) Define all entities in your architecture
> > (2) Identify all data exchange points
> > (3) Identify the type of data (in general) that needs to be exchanged
> > (4) If the type of data is transactional (i.e. purchase order/invoice),
> then
> > the pattern is "Transactional"
> > 
> > I'm wondering:
> > 
> > How would you sort out whether *the type of data is transactional*? 
> 
> Ah - I could have put this a better way: (4) If the exchange is
> transactional in nature
> 
> > - this
> > question is in the context of an assignment I'm engaged on (concerning
> > interoperability of services between disparate IT and different
> > organizations) where I'm supporting a team doing 1&3, against a background
> > of knowing more or less the kind of 2s that are wanted, and explicitly
> > deferring steps like 4 since the data representations of entities are seen
> > as contingently rather than necessarily participating in transactions.
> > 
> > This feels right to me from a philosophical/theoretical point of view, and
> > also practically in that for example the assembly of information that is
> an
> > invoice plays a part in a transaction, but may also be stored in a system
> of
> > record, or play a role in a legal matter.
> 
> Absolutely. I think the shift from the data to the exchange (as in my
> response above) might help resolve this ambiguity.
> 
> Thanks Ann!
> Joe
> 
> > ... or do I have the wrong end of the stick?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Ann W.
> 
> -- 
> Kind Regards,
> Joseph Chiusano
> Associate
> Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> 


http://drrw.net