OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm-ra message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

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

Antecedent. Antecedent. Where's my antecedent?


At 8:52 PM -0500 4/12/09, Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote:
>Mike, Ken
>Please check out my edits of the sections...There seemed to be good 
>and sufficient material for me to work with in what I started 
>From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
>Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:03 PM
>To: Francis McCabe
>Cc: Mike Poulin; James Odell; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] SOA-RA(F) reorganization
>I will reread but I thought the insistence was policies not 
>referring to contracts.
>On Apr 12, 2009, at 8:49 PM, Francis McCabe wrote:
>>I do not believe that we ever signed up for Michaels insistence on 
>>contracts not referring to policies. I for one do not.
>>On Apr 12, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Ken Laskey wrote:
>>>It appears we agree on the specifics for policies and contracts, 
>>>and indeed did discuss much of this before.  I'm wondering if 
>>>something critical got lost in the last Policy section shuffle 
>>>that eld to the current text.
>>>On Apr 12, 2009, at 7:24 PM, Mike Poulin wrote:
>>>>As I recall, a year ago I  initiated a discussion here about 
>>>>relationship between Policies and Contracts. Now, it looks like 
>>>>James has picked up my position. I said that time that: 
>>>>1) contracts (due to their private matter)  may not refer to each 
>>>>other while policies may and effectively do
>>>>2) contracts may include more things than just policies or 
>>>>references to policies, e.g. a selection of a subset of services 
>>>>interfaces derived from the service description. This information 
>>>>is not really a policy though it may be expressed in the form of 
>>>>policy assertions
>>>>3) there may be different types of policies - for the service 
>>>>development and for the run-time. The latter must be mentioned in 
>>>>the service contracts as well as in the service descriptions 
>>>>(otherwise the consumer is not obliged to be compliant with 
>>>>non-specified policies), the former does not need such mentioning 
>>>>but they might be included into development tools and design 
>>>>In any case, Policies AND Contracts deserve much more attention in SOA RM.
>>>>- Michael
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "James Odell" 
>>>>To: <mailto:soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>>Subject: [soa-rm-ra] SOA-RA(F) reorganization
>>>>Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:46:06 -0400
>>>>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,
>>>>Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>>>Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>>>Get a Free Account at <http://www.mail.com/Product.aspx>www.mail.com!
>>>Ken Laskey
>>>MITRE Corporation, M/S H305      phone: 703-983-7934
>>>7515 Colshire Drive                         fax:       703-983-1379
>>>McLean VA 22102-7508
>Ken Laskey
>MITRE Corporation, M/S H305      phone: 703-983-7934
>7515 Colshire Drive                         fax:       703-983-1379
>McLean VA 22102-7508

Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]