Re: [soa-rm-ra] Groups - Modification of Policy_Contract_Business diagram (OASIS_Policy-Contract_Diagram.JPG) uploaded

[michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com]

Danny, thank you for the detailed explanation.

I do buy into measurable rules or measurable statements instead of executable statements. What still have problem with is the proposition. In the Policy or in the Contract nothing is proposed, the statements are either enforced or agree-and-enforced. Probably, the problem is with the word-name rather than with the entity in the diagram.

I can see that an SLA relates to the Service Description but appears in the real world experience via Contract. This is why I put it into the diagram.

As you said, "To do business, a person signs contracts", and I add that person also accepts the Policy, if s/he wants to do business; this is the implicit contract with or without legal recourses. I think, this legal aspect is not a part of the RM. In your example, if a person enters the shop and violates its policy, the person may be not served - no service communication (this may be not a case in the US but I have learned - it is in Europe).

The last point: "A person may have to abide by policies that are not part of a contract" - this is exactly the reason why I mentioned implicit contract. If a person is 'under' a Policy which is not agreed in the contract, this policy is irrelevant to the communication; why the RM should care about such Policy? In other words, if a client and a service provider communicate via a service - there is an explicit or implicit agreement between them; any other policy (internal or external; for client or for provider) that is not in the contract - unrelates to the RM.

- Michael