[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]
"composable" is good by me. Cheers, Rex Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote: > Rex: what's your take? Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com] > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 3:50 PM > To: Mike Poulin; Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Lublinsky, Boris; > 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] > > Composable? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 2:27 PM > To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Mike Poulin; Lublinsky, Boris; > 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] > > Bob, > this is the phrase: > > >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 ... > > > I propose to say: "...a network of independent and composite services, > machines, the..." > > - Michael > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >> To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "Lublinsky, Boris" >> > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:40:28 -0500 >> >> >> There was one sentence that you sent that I could not make head or >> > tail > >> of as I noted. Otherwise, I thought I had incorporated all of your >> comments >> >> Bob >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 1:31 PM >> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Mike Poulin; Lublinsky, Boris; >> 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 am afraid, I am lost. I do not see some of the crucial changes I >> advocated for and you agreed to accommodate: >> >> >> "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in >> terms of its support of business services." >> - MP - great! >> >> "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." >> - MP - my proposal: 'Business services provide business functionality >> > in > >> pursuit of the business outcome; while IT artifacts 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." >> - MP - great! You commented: 'This doesn't make sense to me. It is not >> connected to SOA in anyway' but left the statement. I am for having >> > this > >> statement as it is (it is not my text but very right one IMO) >> >> "Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern, and manage this SOA >> Ecosystem. The SOA Ecosystem must accommodate both sets of concerns >> > for > >> to fulfill its purpose and potential." >> - MP - great! >> >> "Business needs to drive the development of services delivered through >> processes and its supporting IT, which provides the capability that >> satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA." >> - MP - development of services is not necessary delivered through >> processes and supporting IT. This is why 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.' >> >> (i.e. none Business or IT , or both; SOA is in between them) >> >> >> Thus, my variant of the text looks like this: >> >> The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in >> > terms > >> of its support of business services. Business services provide >> > business > >> functionality in pursuit of the business outcome; while IT artifacts >> 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. Neither Business nor IT completely >> > own, > >> govern, and manage this SOA Ecosystem. The SOA Ecosystem must >> accommodate both sets of concerns for to fulfill its purpose and >> potential. Business needs to drive the development of services, which >> provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the >> > business > >> value of SOA. >> >> >> >> >> - Michael >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >>> To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "Lublinsky, Boris" >>> >> <boris.lublinsky@navteq.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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:56:23 -0500 >>> >>> >>> Try this. >>> >>> >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >>> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:31 AM >>> To: Lublinsky, Boris; Mike Poulin; 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] >>> >>> >>> >>> Boris has reminded me one thing: in the paragraph following the two >>> paragraphs we are discussing now we say something like 'SOA is a >>> >> network >> >>> of independent services...' I would modify this phrase a bit saying >>> something like 'SOA is a network of independent and composite >>> services...' >>> >>> Sorry, I did not mention this earlier. >>> >>> This is all what I wanted to say about SOA and Buz. >>> >>> - Michael >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Lublinsky, Boris" >>> To: "Mike Poulin" , 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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:04:35 -0500 >>> >>> >>> I tend to agree with Mike/jeff >>> See below >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >>> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:15 AM >>> To: 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] >>> Importance: High >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> B.L. Moreover, as I re read the text I am realizing more and more >>> > that > >>> this is not so much about SOA but mostly about ESB. I am of course >>> >> over >> >>> simplifying, but hopefully you got the jest. We managed to leap frog >>> business architecture and servicizing the enterprise and jump >>> > directly > >>> into the issues of service interaction - ecosystem. This is fine, >>> > but > >>> who is going to live in this wonderful ecosystem. >>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> B.L. Fair enough. Lets create the door, but may be, just may be open >>> >> it >> >>> up slightly for the next review. This is why I think, the text under >>> discussion, does not belong in the ecosystem, but rather above it. >>> > We > >>> talk about business/IT alignment and then define ecosystem >>> >>> 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: >>> < >>> 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.>> >>> >>> B.L. See comment above >>> >>> 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: >>> < >>> 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.>> >>> >>> B.L. How about: >>> << SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both >>> >> worlds. >> >>> Without involvement of the business, defining service functionality >>> based on the enterprise business model and aligned with the >>> > enterprise > >>> business processes, SOA can't fulfill the promise of business/IT >>> alignment and support for flexible, process-driven enterprise. >>> > Without > >>> involvement of IT, implementing SOA ecosystem, supporting flexible >>> service deployment, interactions, monitoring and management SOA >>> > can't > >>> fulfill the promise of scalable, maintainable IT.>> >>> >>> 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)" To: "Mike Poulin" , "Lublinsky, >>>> >> Boris" >> >>> , rexb@starbourne.com >>> >>>> Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , 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! >>>> >>>> > 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! >>> >>> >>> >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> 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. >>> >>> >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> 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> >>> << bus and tech 2.doc >> >>> >> -- >> An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >> > > > > > -- 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]