RE: [soa-blueprints] Anti-Blueprints - Number of services

["Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com>]

AARRHG!!

See attached.  This is a visualization of the "parking lot" and the resultant "sink hole" that developed below the "trout pond" in SOA RM.  You'll note semantics was a subject that Frank, Ken and matt cannot even see from their observation point over the edge.

Duane

-----Original Message-----
From: marchadr@wellsfargo.com [mailto:marchadr@wellsfargo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 1:00 PM
To: Duane Nickull; marc.adlam@oracle.com; marchadr@wellsfargo.com; Marc.Davies@uk.fujitsu.com; mmatsumura@infravio.com; steve.g.jones@capgemini.com; Theo.Beack@softwareagusa.com; klaskey@mitre.org
Cc: soa-blueprints@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] Anti-Blueprints - Number of services

Do you think we need an ontology pattern?

:)

-----Original Message-----
From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:52 AM
To: Marc Adlam; marchadr@wellsfargo.com; Marc.Davies@uk.fujitsu.com;
mmatsumura@infravio.com; steve.g.jones@capgemini.com;
Theo.Beack@softwareagusa.com; klaskey@mitre.org
Cc: soa-blueprints@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] Anti-Blueprints - Number of services


Marc wrote:

"What I've noticed on this TC so far is that we struggle with semantics in a way that's similar to what first-time SOA implementers face.  We are looking for standard definitions, e.g., give me one standard definition of a service, one standard definition for SOA, etc., so I can document my patterns in a consistent manner.  I see organizations adopting SOA who are trying to solve these semantic problems as well:  one definition for order, one for customer, etc.  Short-term, we in the Blueprints TC have agreed to look to SOA-RM for standard definitions, and I see that as a welcome development.  Patterns and semantics should enjoy a separation of concerns."

+ 1

C'est notre raison d'être (it is our reason for being)

Duane

The-SOA-Sinkhole.png