[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]
For me, an aggregation lacks purpose. I could have an aggregate of gravel or people or plants or planets. These aggragations may or may not serve any purpose. Generally, a composite serves a purpose, whether it is model-based (orchestration) or event-driven (choreography)
-----------------------
Sent via Blackberry
----- Original Message -----
From: Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: Lublinsky, Boris <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>
Cc: Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>; Mike Poulin <mpoulin@usa.com>; Ellinger, Robert S (IS); soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Fri Sep 25 19:49:56 2009
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
I certainly agree that it is important. I think I've made it clear I
prefer it, just not enough to strong oppose going forward without it. Be
that as it may, I don't think we have enough consensus yet.
Cheers,
Rex
Lublinsky, Boris wrote:
> Well,Call it what you want, but this notion should be there. I do not think that people are as diligent as Duane and really will distinguish composability and aggregation. I think composability is more common term, but English is my second language.
> The other point that I was try to make in my earlier email is an attempt to define what exactly business and IT are bringing to SOA and I think that this is important
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
> Sent: Fri 9/25/2009 7:10 PM
> To: Duane Nickull
> Cc: Lublinsky, Boris; Mike Poulin; Ellinger, Robert S (IS); soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
>
>
>
> Now that I would object to including as I have already because it is
> likely to lead our audience to think that only orchestration is suitable
> for SOA. You caught my point about the press and pundit wrt to
> composite/composable. Again, you are correct about the part-whole
> relationship to reusability, and that's what I care about. I need both
> orchestration and choreography, but the world out there is incredibly
> literal-minded and they want rules, which kinda absolves them of the
> need to think things through for themselves. They'd be happier with a
> cookbook, but regardless of what we present in the final product, there
> will be many who will want to use it as cookbook. They are quite like
> those who only understand hammers, so everything else is a nail
>
> Cheers,
> Rex
>
> Duane Nickull wrote:
>
>> Via Aggregation. Aggregation is a UML pattern whereby the parts are
>> "used" by the whole. If the whole does not exist, the parts can exist
>> which is necessary for re-use. Composition (by contrast) is a UML
>> pattern whereby the parts are "part of" the whole, hence their
>> lifecycle is tied to the lifecycle of the whole. When the whole ceases
>> to exist, so do the parts, hence making "reuse" not possible.
>>
>> I think aggregation is a better term, however the press and others
>> have already gone with "service composition" as a buzzword. Service
>> Orchestration is just as good as aggregation IMO.
>>
>> Duane
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/25/09 2:50 PM, "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com> wrote:
>>
>> If the services are not composable, then how are they better
>> compared to existing applications
>>
>> --- original message ---
>> From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was:
>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
>> Date: September 25, 2009
>> Time: 4:41:26 PM
>>
>> Duane, I'm picturing you tugging on Superman's cape, while
>> spittin' into
>> the wind, tilting at windmills and messin' with Bad Bad LeRoy Brown,
>> while sliding into heaven sideways, brew in hand singing, "What a
>> Ride!"
>>
>> You're right, and so is Frank, and I definitely prefer "aggregate-able
>> or capable of being included in various types of aggregations,"...
>>
>> but I think the boat already left, folks. We don't have to catch
>> up with
>> it nor need we catch the next one. It will go as it will.
>>
>> I personally don't have strong enough feelings about it to be road
>> kill
>> for it or against it. I happen to be involved in a set of SOA services
>> that absolutely MUST be composable, but I am satisfied that they
>> will be
>> regardless of how this sentence in theSOA-RAF introduction is worded.
>>
>> It makes it marginally easier for me to get the business audiences I
>> deal with to act right if "composable" services is something I can
>> point
>> to when or if we get people insisting on something really dumb, like
>> "Point-to-Point" is the only distribution protocol that counts,"
>> or "we
>> can use the rules for RSS Feeds for all distribution." I suppose
>> its not
>> impossible, but I don't really expect to see it.
>>
>> BTW, I don't read the sentence to mean that ALL independent services
>> MUST also be composable. It means " a network of independent services
>> and/or composable services." I think independent composable
>> services is
>> almost a contradiction of terms or almost an oxymoron.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Rex
>>
>> Duane Nickull wrote:
>> > My take on this:
>> >
>> > http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/09/soa-anti-patterns-service-composition.html
>> >
>> > D
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9/25/09 1:21 PM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I do not have any strong objections.
>> >
>> > 'Composable' means to me that the service may be composed; the
>> > question is - composed by what and how this corresponds to
>> > 'independent'? 'Composite' or 'aggregate' (as Ken pointed once) is
>> > the service, which is composed already by other services, which
>> > comprises other services, i.e. it is not independent. This is what
>> > I tried to "EmFasis" :-)
>> >
>> > You, folks, decide.
>> >
>> > - Michael
>> >
>> >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com>
>> > > To: "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>, "Mike
>> > Poulin" <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: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:01:34 -0500
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Mike, I like the sentence. Boris, I think that "composable
>> > services" is
>> > > the correct term. I've heard many "experts" and "gurus" use the
>> term
>> > > and concept since at least 2003 and seems to me to put the
>> > "EmFasis on
>> > > the rite Silobbal", as my dad would say.
>> > >
>> > > -----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
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > An Excellent Credit Score is 750
>> > > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 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.
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle Bundle -
>> > http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE
>> > Twitter: duancechaos
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle Bundle -
>> _http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE
>> _Twitter: duancechaos
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Rex Brooks
> President, CEO
> Starbourne Communications Design
> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
> Berkeley, CA 94702
> Tel: 510-898-0670
>
>
>
>
--
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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]