Re: [soa-rm-ra] IBM's definition of a reference architecture

[Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>]

In addition, IBM should be able to use the RA we are developing as a  
foundational (or counterpoint) on which to build their best practice  
versions.

Ken

On Jul 9, 2008, at 6:46 PM, Don Flinn wrote:

> IBM defines a reference architecture (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/2774.html 
> ) as:
> "A reference architecture is a resource containing a consistent set  
> of architectural best practices for use by all the teams in your  
> organization."
> Whereas our spec's definition is:
> "A reference architecture models the abstract architectural elements  
> in the domain independent of the technologies, protocols, and  
> products that are used to implement the domain."
>
> Our definition and the resulting specification is highly abstract,  
> while the IBM definition is much more concrete.  As we point out,  
> the more concrete architectural descriptions should be able to use  
> the concepts from the more abstract ones.  Consequently, I don't see  
> any conflict; as each has is place and its usefulness.  Further, a  
> highly abstract reference architecture is not prone to change,  
> whereas as one that is more concrete has more of the potential for  
> change.
> Don
>
> -- 
> Don Flinn
> President
> Mansurus LLC
> e-mail: flinn@alum.mit.edu
> Tel: 781-856-7230
> http://mansurus.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305      phone: 703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive                         fax:       703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508

smime.p7s