Re: [soa-rm-ra] Discussion of Ontology

[Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@mac.com>]

If there is one term from the RM that I would try to sharpen up more,  
it is Execution Context. This seems to mean all things to all people.
Frank

On Sep 15, 2008, at 3:23 PM, michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com wrote:

> I would like to add a few points to the discussion. In SOA Yahoo!  
> Group and in other audiences I talked about EC within two following  
> considerations:
>
> 1)	EC consists of two parts: business and technical. Both of them  
> may be expressed via policies. Both of them can affect RWE while  
> service business functionality can stay the same.
> (this is where RA service differes from Web Service, which does not  
> have an execution and RWE because of being just an interface)
>
> Aforementioned interpretation of EC confirms that the service  
> interaction includes both service communication and service  
> execution activities and policies.
>
> 2) EC is a part of the Service Description and derived Service  
> Contracts. Service Provider guarantees service RWE in only specified  
> EC.
> A service may be used in any EC. However, the consumer encounters  
> additional risk if the service is used (w/o testing) in the EC that  
> is different from the one defined in the Service Contract.
>
> Both statements were met with understanding and did not initiate any  
> concerns. Would you agree to include them into RA?
>
>
> As of Service Performance [Interaction, RWE-Cause(ServiceAction)- 
> Effect], mentioned by Rex, I think that word performance does not  
> addresses all variety of Interaction, RWE-Cause(ServiceAction)- 
> Effect because service business purpose may be not in the  
> performances; to me, the word might be like Execution, i.e. Service  
> Execution phase.
>
> Cheers,
> - Michael

smime.p7s