Re: [sca-assembly] SCA Visual Modeling "Standard?"

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

Title: Re: [sca-assembly] SCA Visual Modeling "Standard?"

Dale:

No problem - I was feeling disruptive.  

;-)

BTW – I just joined this TC.  Firs blog post about SCA too:

http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/09/service-component-architecture-i-am.html

/d


On 9/27/07 11:44 AM, "Moberg Dale" <dmoberg@axway.com> wrote:

There is a model of SCA in UML at
 
(1)  http://www.osoa.org/display/Main/SCA+Expressed+as+a+UML+Model  attributed to Mike Edwards
 
And I even found a link this week what might be a critique of SCA terminology from a UML “purist” (sorry Duane)
 
(2) http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/09/soa-anti-patterns-service-composition.html

that would change at least some of the arrows decorated with solid diamonds of composition in (1) to hollow diamonds of aggregation! For example, destroying a Composite in (1) would presumably not necessarily destroy the Components.
 
A google of “SCA UML” already yields a number of entries also!
 
So I second Martin that some issue be raised that calls for a TC review of a sufficiently accurate SCA model in UML 2.0 for the group to have at least as background. Unfortunately I don’t know exactly what in the submission to tie this issue to.
 
 


 
 

---

From: Martin Chapman [mailto:martin.chapman@oracle.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 11:20 AM
To: 'Michael Rowley'; 'Jeffrey A. Estefan'; sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [sca-assembly] SCA Visual Modeling "Standard?"


Sounds like we should raise an issue and chat about it there.



Martin.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Rowley [mailto:mrowley@bea.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 8:54 PM
To: Jeffrey A. Estefan; sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [sca-assembly] SCA Visual Modeling "Standard?"

I’m not a UML expert, but I believe that UML’s concept of a component maps to SCA’s concept of an “implementation”, not to SCA’s components.
 
For example, in UML, could a single Java class be represented as multiple components in one component diagram (each configured differently), as can be done in SCA?
 
Michael
 

---

From: Jeffrey A. Estefan [mailto:jeffrey.a.estefan@jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:30 PM
To: sca-assembly@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [sca-assembly] SCA Visual Modeling "Standard?"


Martin & Mike,



I would like to know why an visual modeling industry standard such as OMG UML 2 was not used (and currently not being used) to represent SCA artifacts; specifically, SCA Component and SCA Composite diagrams.  It seems a no-brainer to leverage the UML 2 component diagram to represent SCA components and UML 2 composite structure diagrams to represent SCA composites.  The current diagram formats used in all SCA specs from Open SOA (and now under the auspices of OASIS) seem to use custom diagram semantics to represent services, references, and properties when UML 2 provided and required interfaces and the use of ports would suffice just fine for both SCA components and composites.



I ask because there is probably some history to this decision and since I did not participate in development of the Open SOA specs, I'm curious as to why an industry standard such as UML 2 was not used and if it is worth considering for use in the OASIS version of these specs; particularly, since these are architecture-centric artifacts.



Regards...



- Jeff Estefan, JPL

-- 
**********************************************************************
"Speaking only for myself"
Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com
Community Music - http://www.mix2r.com
My Band - http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury
MAX 2007 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/07/adobe-max-2007.html
**********************************************************************