RE: [soa-rm-ra] SOA-RA(F) reorganization

["Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com>]

Jim:

I have been working on a reorganization of the
governance/management/policy and management sections per the
instructions of last Wednesday.  It is nearly complete.  I will be
forwarding it by a Week from next Wednesday.

Bob 

-----Original Message-----
From: James Odell [mailto:email@jamesodell.com] 
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 8:39 PM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] SOA-RA(F) reorganization

Rex,

Yes, I agree.  A section for Policies outside Contract -- in addition to
the leaving a  Policies and Contracts -- makes good sense to me.

Ciao,
Jim

On 4/11/09 7:41 PM, "Rex Brooks" indited:

> Than ks Jim,
> 
> I agree about Policies pertaining to more than just contracts. I think

> our focus on crossing organizational boundaries tends to make us think

> along those lines more than we would if we were more focused within an

> enterprise boundary. Role policies, for instance, are more routine 
> within an enterprise, and rules for what happens when events are 
> reported are often more prescribed.
> 
> I'd just add a section for Policies outside Contract context.
> 
> Cheers,
> Rex
> 
> At 5:46 PM -0400 4/11/09, James Odell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> After yet another reading of the SOA-RA (Foundation?) and having sat 
>> through the recent spate of meetings, I have the following say about 
>> the reorganization of the SOA-RA:
>> 
>> Overall, I think that the chapters and topics are sequenced in a 
>> coherent and logical manner.  Perhaps, it is because I read it too 
>> many times now.  But, I don't think so.
>> Also, I understand the need to minimize the amount of work needed on 
>> the SOA-RA at this point in its development.  We need to get it 
>> released for public comment - without compromising quality and 
>> understandability, of course.
>> Having said this, the only thing that bothers me enough to suggest a 
>> reorganizational change is the area of Policies:
>> 
>> 1)  Policies, in general, are depicted in document far earlier than 
>> they are finally addressed (by 40-50 pages).  Since policies - IMO - 
>> are an important ingredient in the SOA-RA, I would like to see them 
>> addressed earlier.  (My personal opinion is that policies are not 
>> mentioned anywhere near the amount that they should. For example, 
>> they are used in events, composition of services, roles, and 
>> organizations.  However, since this would involve additions to the 
>> current document, I will not push this)
>> 
>> 2) I strongly dislike grouping the entire topic with contracts.
>> While policies are used for contracts, Policy is a standalone concept

>> - which neither depends on nor is used solely with Contract.
>> (Even the OMG and W3C treat policies as a separate notion.)  Why is 
>> this reasonable?  Because policies are used in a variety of 
>> situations - only one of which is contracts.  By placing Policies in 
>> lock step with (and almost subordinate to) with Contracts is not 
>> appropriate, IMO.
>> 
>> 3) My suggestion: separate Policies and Contracts into two distinct 
>> subsections (e.g., 4.4 and 4.5).
>> 
>> In short, this would provide clarity for the notion of Policy and not

>> require much change to the current document.
>> 
>> 
>> All the best,
>> 
>> Jim
> 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
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