[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra]positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
I believe service orientation has the enormous potential to become the basic business operational model and SOA will be the basis of the Business Architecture. Since we do not have time for this discussion now, let’s return to our text. The only thing I hope to set in the RA standard is an open door to the Business opportunity of SOA instead of locking it in IT. This means I vote for enough ‘ambiguity’ in the text that would allow anybody to go with SOA in both – technical and business – directions, if needed. The following is my modifications to the text that together aim only one statement: “SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds.” Particularly: a) I agree in full with: <<SOA systems cannot be understood by a simple decomposition into IT components and subsystems. They must be understood within their context or environment; particularly, when there are many interactions among the parts. For example, a biological ecosystem is a self-sustaining association of plants, animals, and the physical environment in which they live. Understanding an ecosystem often requires this holistic perspective of the system and its environment rather than one focusing on the system's individual parts.>> b) I DISagree with << The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in terms of its support of business services, which is its environment.>> My proposal is this: << The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in terms of its support of business services.>> c) I DISagree with << Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of the business outcome; while SOA services provide IT artifacts that facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business services. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds. >> My proposal is this: <<SOA absorbs business functionality, in pursuit of the business outcome, together with its technical realization and support provided by Information Technology. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds.>> d) I DISagree with << Business needs drive the development of services delivered through IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> My proposal is: << Business needs to drive the development of services, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> or << Business needs to drive the development of services delivered through Business and IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> Regards, - Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com> > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>, rexb@starbourne.com > Cc: "Laskey, Ken" <klaskey@mitre.org>, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:30:41 -0500 > > > Mike: > > > > We are trying to get to the same concept, but really what is being > discussed is a cultural paradigm shift. In my view, the execution > context is the technical context within which the service components > exist and within in which they are executed as enablers and support for > the process. The service components are the parts and subassemblies. > The process flow, which is part of the execution context, as defined by > the orchestration or choreography (both of which have business rules > engines to ensure that policies/standards/business rules/etc. are > followed). > > > > Business process modeling as instantiated by the assembled of the SOA > service components, with the associated business rule, links the system > to the business processes. Provided that the business processes serve > the goals or objectives or the business (that is provides value to the > business) then the tools as instantiated in the SOA service multiplies > the effectiveness of the process. > > > > The cultural shift involves the fact that when business challenges or > opportunities arise, the business processes and SOA supporting services > can meet those challenge because SOA enable agile systems. I define > agility as "successful response to unexpected challenges and > opportunities." BTW, this is the definition of the Agility Forum (circa > 1990) associated with Lehigh University (that is Nagel and his group > that wrote the book on the agile enterprise). Currently, the monolithic > architecture of most ERP-like systems do not allow agility, while > functional architecture place emphasis on optimizing for the function; > creating silos. There is an axiom in Systems Engineering that > optimizing the subsystems, sub-optimizes the system. SOA enables both > optimization and agility of the system, but requires mapping of the > system to the organization's processes as the price > > > > I could and have said a great deal more, but I think that is enough. > The linkage is there for anyone to get the maximum value out of the SOA > and both the business processes and the composite applications (process > assembled service components???) or whatever operating in the execution > context, must enable and support the processes. As the processes change > in response to challenges and opportunities, both the processes and the > composite application must respond quickly and successfully. This is > not the way it is done now, and that is the cultural change that is > needed. > > > > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 7:18 PM > To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Lublinsky, Boris; rexb@starbourne.com > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > > > > Robert, > > as we know SOA defines Execution Context. Since we never defined what it > includes, I suggest (and promote this opinion) that EC includes Business > EC and Technical EC. Business services cannot be 'the environment of the > SOA Ecosystem' because it is included into SOA. Business EC defines > business execution policies and Technical EC defines technical execution > policies. SOA Ecosystem comprises both business and technical realms. > > Phrase "while SOA services provide IT artifacts that facilitate > connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business > services."" has a problem because SOA service does not necessary > "facilitate connectivity of functional units". For instance,a > self-contained stand-alone business technical service realises its own > business function or feature w/o joining with other "functional units". > Plus, SOA Service may or may not contain any IT artefacts. Time when SOA > was considered a pure technical thing is gone (and for good). > > I agree with you on "The value of IT is the same as any other tool". > This is why I think that statement " Business needs drive the > development of services delivered through IT, which provides the > capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of > SOA" requires corrections. Development of services is not necessary > delivered through IT, it may be purely manual business service and many > services of such nature exist. > > Based on my discussion in several Business Architecture groups on the > Web, any business process in Business may be defined as business service > with or without technical component. Implementation of the business > service, as we know, is not that important for service-oriented > Architecture. > > If we state that SOA positions BETWEEN Business and IT, we MAY NOT > attribute it to IT only and confront it with the business service. This > is illogical. > > - Michael > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" > To: "Lublinsky, Boris" , rexb@starbourne.com > Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , mpoulin@usa.com, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:19:49 -0500 > > > See below > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:58 AM > To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > > I have no idea what this means: > > "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in > terms of its support of business services, which is its environment." > > What is which environment? > Business services are the environment of the SOA Ecosystem. > > Also: > " Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of > business outcome; while SOA services provide IT artifacts that > facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the > business services." > > SOA services is a complete misnomer. Infrastructure I can buy, but SOA > services? > I disagree with that. The infrastructure provides nothing except an > operating context. Only when SOA Service (which in my understanding is > a composite application with contractual obligations) provide any value > to the customer. > > And finally: > " Business needs drive the development of services delivered through IT, > which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the > business value of SOA." > > This has several problems: > 1. Business is concerned only with business services and drives their > design, not development 2. What is the business value? What does this > points to? > > My understanding of the term development is that it includes design, but > if you want to change it...The value of IT is the same as any other > tool, to multiple the value of the process. > Adam Smith pointed this out in Chapter 1 of Book 1 of the Wealth of > Nations. This is a point lost on IT as this comment demonstrates. > > I think we are digressing. > > I hope not. > -----Original Message----- > From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:46 AM > To: rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > > Hi: > > Please try this edit. > > Bob > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:34 AM > To: Lublinsky, Boris > Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > > Very minor grammar correction, Boris, > > I'm just a nit picker. > > ;) > Rex > > Lublinsky, Boris wrote: > > I haven't seen people discussing my grammar so much lately. I am doing > > > something wrong sorry. > > I am fine with managing > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] > > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:07 AM > > To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) > > Cc: Lublinsky, Boris; Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > > [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > I'm being technically challenged at the moment with remote > participation > > > > in overlapping meetings the latter of which isn't starting and > > the former of which appears to have ended early while I dropped > > off to attend the latter.Sheseh! > > > > Here's how I would correct Boris's grammar with one word-substitution: > > > I > > > > don't want the concept of "orchestration" being confused with the use > of > > > > "orchestrating" so I am changing that to "managing" which we don't > spend > > > > much attention on in the RAF yet .(I just want to avoid anyone asking > if > > > > we mean that "all business services must be delivered via > > orchestration."): > > > > Business drives the definition of business services aligned with > > enterprise business functionality and business processes, > > managing execution of these services, while IT defines > > infrastructure services, > > > providing support across a wide range of business services and > > implements both types of services. Such collaboration allows > > stronger communications between both, by creating one-to-one > > mapping between business and IT artifacts. > > > > Regardless, since it is clear that Bob did not actually pick up > > Boris's additions and so didn't drop them, and Ken had one more > > addition he was considering, could we ask Ken to correct Boris's > > grammar, fold in Bob's slight rewording and add his piece? Then, > > perhaps Jeff and/or Jim could make the crisp differentiation > > between business services and SOA services or between business > > services and IT > > > services > > > > Cheers, > > Rex > > > > Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote: > > > >> Didn't intend to drop Boris's additions...must of missed them. I > >> thought we were to start from where you left off, so that is > >> what I > >> > > did. > > > >> Sorry Boris...Perhaps we were working concurrently and the material > crossed. > >> > >> Bob > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] > >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:10 AM > >> To: Lublinsky, Boris > >> Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; > >> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > >> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > >> > >> My task was to get the work rolling. I have minor quibbles with > >> > > correct > > > >> English grammar in Boris's additions, and I agree with Jeff that > >> the distinction between "business service' and "SOA service" > >> needs to be made. In general I think simpler is better, but as > >> long as the grammar is corrected, I'd be fine with Boris's > >> additions. I don't have any problems with Bob's minor rewording, > >> but i don't see why he dropped Boris's additions.. > >> > >> I'll look at it again in the morning. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Rex > >> > >> Lublinsky, Boris wrote: > >> > >> > >>> You through away all changes that were suggested after this initial > >>> > >>> > >> one? > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com] > >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:41 PM > >>> To: rexb@starbourne.com > >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > >>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > >>> > >>> I'd recommend some minor rewording... -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] > >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:16 PM > >>> To: rexb@starbourne.com > >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > >>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: > >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] > >>> > >>> First pass at the Section 1.2 as an additional paragraph after > >>> the first paragraph. I include the first paragraph and the > >>> start of the current second paragraph here for the context: > >>> > >>> 1.2 Service Oriented Archtecture - An Ecosystem Perspective > >>> > >>> Many systems cannot be understood by a simple decomposition into > >>> > > parts > > > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> and subsystems -- in particular when there are many > >>> interactions between the parts. For example, a biological > >>> ecosystem is a self-sustaining association of plants, animals, > >>> and the hysical environment in which they live. Undestanding an > >>> ecosystem often requires a holistic perspective rather than one > >>> focusing on the > >>> > >>> > >> system's individual parts. > >> > >> > >>> The SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the > >>> boundary between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor > >>> wholly Business, > >>> > > > > > >>> but is of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, > govern > >>> > > > > > >>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns must be > >>> accommodated for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes. > >>> Business > > >>> needs drive the development of services delivered through IT, > >>> providing the capability that satisfies those needs. This is > >>> the business value of SOA. > >>> > >>> From a holistic perspective, a SOA-based system is a network of > >>> independent services, machines, the people who operate, affect, > >>> use and govern those services as well as ... > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Rex > >>> > >>> Rex Brooks wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> Hi Ken, Everyone, > >>>> > >>>> I believe that the email you are looking for is your reply to > Frank: > >>>> > > > > > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/email/archives > > > >>>> / > >>>> 200906/msg00012.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> This is what Frank Wrote Jun 14, 2009, at 7:12 PM: > >>>> > >>>> "I sympathize with the sentiment behind this. We have > >>>> consistently identified SOA as being at the boundary between > >>>> business and IT. It > > >>>> is > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> neither wholly IT nor wholly business but is of both worlds. > >>>> > >>>> That represents potentially one of SOA's greatest opportunities; > and > >>>> > > > > > >>>> the source of its weaknesses: neither business nor IT can > completely > >>>> > > > > > >>>> own/grok SOA. > >>>> > >>>> Frank" > >>>> > >>>> The email referenced above contains the most or all of the thread > "Are > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> we being ignored?" > >>>> > >>>> I'm not sure we would help ourselves if we say more than "The > >>>> SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the boundary > >>>> between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor wholly > >>>> Business, but is > >>>> > > > > > >>>> of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern > >>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns MUST be > >>>> > > accommodated > > > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>>> for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes." > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Rex > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Laskey, Ken wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> This is a reminder that this week we are scheduled to discuss > >>>>> > > adding > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> the text on the overlap of SOA and business. Below is text > suggested > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> by Michael Poulin and there is another email from Boris with a lot > > >>>>> of > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> idea that would need to be condensed and > >>>>> > > added/substituted/combined. > > > >>>>> Let's get the discussion far enough along that we can bring this > to > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> (close to) closure by the end of Wednesday's call. > >>>>> > >>>>> I remember there was an email where Frank wrote something very > >>>>> > > crisp > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> on this subject that I replied was exactly what we needed to say. > >>>>> Unfortunately, I have no idea when that email thread occurred. If > > >>>>> someone could find it, I think it would be a good contribution to > the > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> discussion. > >>>>> > >>>>> Back to Mike's suggested text, two immediate things come to mind. > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. Section 1.4 is a discussion of the views and this is not a view > > >>>>> to > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> be added as 1.4.4. I think it fits after section 1.2, possibly as > > >>>>> another short section. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2. It is not obvious to me what the phrase "the similarity of > >>>>> the principles of the Value Networks business model" means. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ken > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ------ > >>>>> > >>>>> Dr. Kenneth Laskey > >>>>> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 > >>>>> 7515 Colshire Drive fax: > > >>>>> 703-983-1379 > >>>>> McLean VA 22102-7508 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] Sent: > >>>>> Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:31 AM > >>>>> To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org > >>>>> Subject: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and > business > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Folks, > >>>>> > >>>>> I join Francis and Boris in suggestion that SOA RA's Introduction > > >>>>> would benefit from adding a couple of paragraphs on the > >>>>> business aspects of SOA positioned across Business and IT. > >>>>> > >>>>> In the previous message I composed a few words for a small section > > >>>>> on > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> this topic and propose to discuss them as an initial draft during > the > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> next (or following) Telecom. Proposed text may be found in the > middle > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> of this message chain. > >>>>> > >>>>> Any suggestions? > >>>>> > >>>>> - Michael > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ----------- > >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: RE: todos for PR2 > >>>>> > >>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org Date: 8 > >>>>> > > Sep > > > >>>>> 2009 16:21:26 -0000 > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ----------- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> "positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business" is what I > write > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> a lot for last few months. So, let me propose a strawman for this > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> text: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> 1.4.4 Business Value of the Service Oriented Architecture > >>>>> > >>>>> A Service Oriented Architecture realizes principles of the concept > > >>>>> of > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> service orientation in the sphere of architecture. The > architecture > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> in the organisation comprises both business architecture and > >>>>> technical architecture of the systems [ref. to TOGAF 9.0]. > >>>>> While SOA-based systems address aspects of the technical > >>>>> architecture, > >>>>> > > the > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> similarity of the principles of the Value Networks business model > and > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> SOA allows us to see SOA as a conceptual bridge between > >>>>> corporate Business and IT. > >>>>> > >>>>> Noticed similarity opens up new possibilities for Business and IT > >>>>> > > to > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> construct service-oriented customer-centric convergent solutions > >>>>> > > for > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> business problems. Service orientation enables operational > >>>>> and technical flexibility, which contributes to business > >>>>> efficiency the > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> great deal. The Service Orientation concept has the potential > >>>>> not only to align IT with Business, but also to align the > >>>>> entire > >>>>> > > company > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> with the market dynamics. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> If the ideas in this writing are acceptable, I will work on the > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> wording. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> - Michael Poulin > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ----------- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> From: Francis McCabe To: "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org RA" > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:24:08 -0700 > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ----------- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. As Boris alluded to, I think that a paragraph or two in > >>>>> the introduction positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and > >>>>> business could be very useful. It is also pretty faithful to > >>>>> the RAF! > >>>>> > >>>>> 2. The concept of interaction in the RM referred *everything* > >>>>> involved in interacting with services. For the RA we have to > >>>>> > > unpack > > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> that some. This is the foundation for the multi-leveled concept of > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> joint action. This should go in Section 3.1. > >>>>> > >>>>> 3. I think that Danny's security diagram should be updated > >>>>> and incorporated. > >>>>> > >>>>> 4. The trust and willingness stuff should go in. > >>>>> > >>>>> 5. It would be good if we could go through the text bolding > defined > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> concepts. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ----------- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>>>> - > >>>>> ----------- > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date > > >>>>> Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> -- > >>> Rex Brooks > >>> President, CEO > >>> Starbourne Communications Design > >>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison > >>> Berkeley, CA 94702 > >>> Tel: 510-898-0670 > >>> > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - 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 > > > >>> > >>> 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 > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> 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.ph > >> p > >> > > > > > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > Rex Brooks > President, CEO > Starbourne Communications Design > GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison > Berkeley, CA 94702 > Tel: 510-898-0670 > > > > 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 > > > -- > > An Excellent Credit Score is 750 > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! > <http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;216722518;39159097;q?http://www.freecredi > treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5% > 20> > -- An Excellent Credit Score is 750 See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]