[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Re: [ebsoa] RE: [fwsi] RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ebsoa] Thereal SOA challenge?
That's what I believe the FERA-based SOA can do for us: Give us a stable model that defines each of the Information Models, the Semantics and the Run-Time SOA model. We are working these three items into the next generation of the OASIS Technical Architecture. You can view these three separate papers, generously donated by Goran, Vasco and George W. Brown (from Intel) at: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebsoa/download.php/15263/SOA_CS_V0.1.doc http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebsoa/download.php/14407/SOA_IM_V0.1.doc http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebsoa/download.php/14406/Run-time_SOA_V0.1.doc Peter F Brown wrote: > Sounds good in theory, but who is going to agree the semantics to make all > that automatable? Who/what is going to build/enable the "federated trust > network"? the market? governments? standards organisations? To use Goran's > #7 and #8, do we need a methodology (=policies, business practices, > industry-level agreements) to make it happen? and still remain agile > (avoiding the pitfalls of EDI)? > > Coming from the government sector, we are asking ourselves: do we have a > role in leading the way by mandating certain standards and terminology (take > for example the whole area of "e-enabling" public procurement contracts, > accounting for up to 20% of GDP in some countries) for use in developing > SOA-based services? Our interest, for example, in a reference model, is > precisely the ability to support very diverse commercial and open source > offers while keeping an underlying coherent model in which they are all able > to work together. > > OASIS has talked about developing a "common core" of themes and messages > that underpin the work of the different SOA-related TCs, and it would seem > that this thread has boot-strapped that process...where can it go from here, > rather than getting lost in posting across at least 5 lists, possibly more > to come.... > > Peter > > ------------- > Peter F Brown > --- > Chair, CEN eGovernment Focus Group > --- > Senior Expert > eGovernment - Legal, Organisational and International Issues > Austrian Federal Chancellery > --- > Co-Editor, OASIS SOA Reference Model > --- > Office: > E: email@example.com > T: +43 1 53115 2595 > W: www.bka.gv.at > Personal: > E: http://public.xdi.com/=Peter.Brown > W: www.XMLbyStealth.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Hardin [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > Sent: 16 November 2005 20:08 > To: Goran Zugic > Cc: Hungenahally, Suresh; David Webber (XML); Duane Nickull; Jones, Steve; > McGregor.Wesley@tbs-sct.gc.ca; email@example.com; > firstname.lastname@example.org; 'ebSOA OASIS TC'; > email@example.com; James Bryce Clark; > firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com > Subject: [soa-rm] Re: [ebsoa] RE: [fwsi] RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ebsoa] The real > SOA challenge? > > It's all very simple from my standpoint: > > Federated Trust Network > Federated Registry / Repository > Customized Executable Business Process which operate on those federated > networks..... > > Goran Zugic wrote: > >>David, I do not want to argue about the history. SOA (Web Services, >>ebXML, and many other SOA related concepts, standards, etc.) has not >>suddenly emerged from nowhere. >> >>Suresh, if I understand correctly your point, you think that the >>business process modeling, grouping and taxonomy of processes are >>important SOA enablers. I completely agree with you. It is very >>important but not the only aspect of the entire SOA picture. What I am >>also interested in is the SOA enterprise architecture and real >>alignment between the business and technology. No marketing hype but real > > stuff. > >>These are my questions. Not only for you but for everybody on this >>thread. I am just using these questions to continue with discussion. >>Do not worry I will provide my answers later and I hope that you will >>keep adding new questions as well. The more questions and the more >>discussions trying to form answers the better. I am sure we will not >>change the world but at least we can start to communicate more often >>and exchange ideas. >> >>1. How do we integrate business processes we model as services and >>technology? Here I mean a real automatic integration without army of >>developers working on the "SOA Enterprise Architecture" to implement >>processes just modeled or to implement changes just introduced. To me >>that kind of architecture is not SOA. That is old school which we >>shortly talked about in our history introduction. >> >>2. How do we make SOA agile? Again automatic implementation of changes >>without coding and both static and dynamic. >> >>3. How do we model and support business process semantics? Not just >>message exchanges and message routing. >> >>4. How do we use standards and support standard convergence? >> >>5. What is our SOA Reference Model? >> >>6. What is our complete SOA reference architecture? >> >>7. Do we have an SOA methodology and what the SOA methodology is all > > about? > >> >>8. What are our SOA best practices? >> >>9. What are the most critical SOA missing points and failures so far >>and how to fix them or not repeat them? >> >>10. What is the overall OASIS plan with regards to SOA, SOA TCs >>related work and their relationship? >> >>11. How can we start to work together and use each others "products"? >> >>12. How can we (TCs and OASIS) convince more leading vendors to be >>involved in the SOA specs development and start using SOA specs we are >>working on? >> >> >>I think that we should keep the entire original content of the >>messages for the completeness of the thread. >> >>Goran >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Hungenahally, Suresh > > <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> > >> *To:* David Webber (XML) <mailto:email@example.com> ; >> firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com> ; Duane >> Nickull <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; John Hardin >> <mailto:email@example.com> ; Jones, Steve >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> >> *Cc:* McGregor.Wesley@tbs-sct.gc.ca >> <mailto:McGregor.Wesley@tbs-sct.gc.ca> ; email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; >> email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; >> email@example.com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; >> email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> ; >> email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 15, 2005 11:06 PM >> *Subject:* RE: [ebsoa] RE: [fwsi] RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ebsoa] The real >> SOA challenge? >> >> Hi, >> >> I am new to the group. Please bear with me if I do not understand >> how this works. >> >> Agree 100% with David Webber, the key is in this point that David >> makes "So much for history - no need to dwell there - the challenge >> now is to bring *real business enabled XML-driven processes and SOA >> to fruition."* >> ** >> Which means we need to clearly address: >> >> 1. SOA and processes integration by broad domains (Finance, Telco, >> Transport, Defence, Government etc.) We could use models such as the >> eTOM as a starting point. >> 2. Establish a standard grouping of processes within the business >> domains >> 3. Then look at which of these can be enabled using XML. >> 4. In Australia the DOMEDI group did similar work in the Transport >> domain (thouogh for a different purpose) >> 5. Finally a taxonomy of the business, processes, enablers and XML >> transactions >> >> Regards. Suresh >> >> ________________________________________________ >> >> Dr. Suresh Hungenahally| *Capgemini* | Melbourne >> Senior Manager >> 477 Collin St. Melbourne 3000 Australia >> T. + 61 3 9613 3343 | M. + 61 402 408 816| F. + 61 3 9613 3333. >> E. email@example.com >> <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> | www.capgemini.com >> <http://www.capgemini.com> >> >> *Join the Collaborative Business Experience* >> ________________________________________________________ >> >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> *From:* David Webber (XML) [mailto:email@example.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, 16 November 2005 2:55 PM >> *To:* firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>; >> Duane Nickull; John Hardin; Jones, Steve >> *Cc:* McGregor.Wesley@tbs-sct.gc.ca; firstname.lastname@example.org; >> email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; >> email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; >> email@example.com; >> firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com >> *Subject:* Re: [ebsoa] RE: [fwsi] RE: [soa-rm] RE: [ebsoa] The real >> SOA challenge? >> >> Goran, >> >> While I like what you say vis SOA here - I have to take you to task >> on history ; -) >> >> The ebXML foundation came out of the work of the XML/edi Group >> aligned with the work of CEFACT on ooEDI. >> >> It completely breaks the mold on EDI. Yes - things like ebMS are >> founded on EDI+ communications - but the core of the ebXMl stack - >> registry-centric XML-driven collaboration - and the notion of the >> "Fusion of Five" is designed to sweep away the old EDI practices. >> Unfortunately XML as implemented today is nothing more than a >> slightly better EDI. The whole XML revolution is yet to truely take >> hold. >> >> As for web services - this was a shameless grab by IBM and Microsoft >> - attempting to be first to market ahead of ebXML with concepts that >> in essence are nothing more than "real-time EDI" - with all the same >> strengths and weaknesses of the >> original real-time EDI implementations - just using XML and the >> internet instead of EDI and private networks. >> >> So much for history - no need to dwell there - the challenge now is >> to bring real business enabled XML-driven processes and SOA to > > fruition. > >> >> Cheers, DW >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> For example, Web Services are initiated with an idea of >> services introduced by Microsoft 6-7 years ago and this idea has >> been formed from distributed computing and component-based >> computing ideas and "learn on mistakes" lessons from many >> organizations in 80s and 90s; ebXML is mostly based on EDI ideas >> and "learn on mistakes" lessons, etc. >> >> This message contains information that may be privileged or >> confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is >> intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not >> the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, >> retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any >> part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify >> the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. >> > > > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > | john c hardin > | Chief Technology Officer > | http://www.maphin.net > | 606.598.7353 office > | 606.813.4316 cell > | mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > | > | Chair - OASIS ebSOA Technical Committee > | http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ebsoa > | > | > | "The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the > | image of a global village." > | > | Marshall McLuhan, "Gutenberg Galaxy", 1962 > |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | john c hardin | Chief Technology Officer | http://www.maphin.net | 606.598.7353 office | 606.813.4316 cell | mailto:email@example.com | | Chair - OASIS ebSOA Technical Committee | http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ebsoa | | | "The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the | image of a global village." | | Marshall McLuhan, "Gutenberg Galaxy", 1962 |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~