[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Are we being ignored?
I agree. I also agree with Ken's comment. That may be due to the sheer weight in terms of number and the quality of the constituencies we're hearing from which are a bit impatiently waiting for us. I think the SOA Harmonization paper makes it fairly clear, as well, that SOA applies within AND across organizations, not just within. In the end I think our definition for SOA. that it is a set of principles that spans organizations and the overall ecosystem, a point which the NCOIC (Net-Centric Operations Industry Consortium) represents, too. This manifesto viewpoint is self-limiting, and pretty clearly aiming to "own" the field with all this certification stuff and whatnot. In the end, the market will weed out the field. If one set of companies in just about any given domain or business sector/segment employs tools that span across any number of enterprises within the domain and optimize both choreographies and orchestrations of services, and another group employs tools that support only one or maybe two vendors' intra-enterprise ESBs that do not span across all enterprises in that domain such that only those companies who use the same tools can orchestrate their services and likely can't adopt a strategy using flexible choreographies, I would be on the former group surviving rather than the latter, unless there is a de facto monopoly involved. Cheers, Rex At 9:23 AM -0500 6/14/09, Lublinsky, Boris wrote: >Content-Type: text/HTML >X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 >X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 > >According to it SOA is: >A distributed technology architectural model with distinct >characteristics in support of realizing service-orientation. >This is really bad, >He is saying that SOA is a technology, This is the thing that is >killing SOA in the first place. It also opens the door for all kinds >of vendor's wars, proclaiming that their SOA is the best one. > > >From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >Sent: Sun 6/14/2009 2:55 AM >To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Are we being ignored? > >I would like to put your attention on SOA Manifesto at >http://www.soa-manifesto.com/ from Thomas Erl. > >- Michael > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ken Laskey" >To: "Heather Kreger" >Cc: "Jeffrey.A.Estefan@jpl.nasa.gov" , "Duane Nickull" , "Lublinsky, >Boris" , "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org" >Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] SOA RA from opengroup >Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 23:24:41 -0400 > >Heather, > >Thanks for the clarification. Do you folks still have the comments >we previously submitted or should I try to recover them and resubmit? > >Ken > >On May 7, 2009, at 11:14 PM, Heather Kreger wrote: > >> >>Hi, >>My emails to the soa-rm-ra list keep bouncing, >> >>Please remember that the SOA Source Book went to the publishers >>during the San Diego meeting, so it was set before our engagement. >>In addition, the SOA Source Book is supposed to be a snapshot of >>the work at The Open Group at the end of 2008-ish, not normative >>content in and of itself. It is not a standard. The standards work >>that this is a snapshot of will continue to evolve and comments >>will be addressed in the work groups. The SOA Source book will be >>updated accordingly and will point the standard as they are >>released. >> >>As a heads up and so its not misinterpreted, the SOA RA WG is >>making an initial draft based on the IBM submission publically >>available very shortly. It will not go through standardization. >> Its simply our starting point that we can use to solicit comments. >>This draft does not incorporate any major comments. The SOA RA >>group is currently working on the next major draft for this summer >>which will include ABBs, usecases , and comments. >>If you could resend your comments, we still have plenty of time to >>address and respond to them. >> >>I think thus far we have always shown the TOG RA to be more >>concrete than the OASIS RA .. but not a concrete solution in the >>TOGAF sense (if I understand your comment correctly).. >> >>Sincerely, >>Heather Kreger >>STSM, SOA Standards, Standards, SWG, IBM >>Member of IBM Academy of Technology >>Author of "Java and JMX: Building Manageable Systems" >><mailto:kreger@us.ibm.com>kreger@us.ibm.com >>919-543-3211 (t/l 441) cell:919-496-9572 home office: 919-853-3772 >> >> >Ken Laskey <<mailto:klaskey@mitre.org>klaskey@mitre.org> > >05/07/2009 05:44 PM > >To >"Lublinsky, Boris" ><<mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>boris.lublinsky@navteq.com> >cc >"<mailto:soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org" ><<mailto:soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org> >Subject >Re: [soa-rm-ra] SOA RA from opengroup > > > > > >This is distressing because we submitted detailed comments, never got >an acknowledgement even after asking about it, and the comments were >obviously ignored. > >OTOH, if in the harmonization drawings this RA is shown tending >towards a concrete solution rather than an abstract representation of >a solution -- AND THAT IS MADE CLEAR -- then it is what it is. > >Ken > >On May 7, 2009, at 4:18 PM, Lublinsky, Boris wrote: > >> >><http://www.opengroup.org/projects/soa-book/page.tpl?CALLER=page.tpl&ggid=1334>http://www.opengroup.org/projects/soa-book/page.tpl?CALLER=page.tpl&ggid=1334 >> >><http://www.opengroup.org/projects/soa-book/page.tpl?CALLER=page.tpl&ggid=1335>http://www.opengroup.org/projects/soa-book/page.tpl?CALLER=page.tpl&ggid=1335 >> >> Taken straight from IBM >> >> >> >> The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL >> and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. >> If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that >> any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, >> or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have >> received this communication in error, please notify the sender and >> delete/destroy the original message and any copy of it from your >> computer or paper files. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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>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 > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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>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 > > > > > > >-- >Be Yourself @ mail.com! >Choose >From 200+ Email Addresses >Get a Free Account at <http://www.mail.com/Product.aspx>www.mail.com! > > >The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL >and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If >you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any >dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or >any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received >this communication in error, please notify the sender and >delete/destroy the original message and any copy of it from your >computer or paper files. -- 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]