[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]
Yes, Duane, in general, no objections. However, do we need to define composition 'in general' in SOA RA or primarily with respect to services? If the letter is our intention, let me 'trim' your definition in this way: <<composition is a way to combine services into more complex ones. The components or individual services, while part of the whole, may exist independent of the whole.>> What do you think? – Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com> > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "James Odell" <email@jamesodell.com>, "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org" <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] > Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:43:27 -0700 > > I am fine with it as long as we define it such as: > > composition is a way to combine services, objects or data types > into more complex ones. The components, while part of the whole, > may exist independent of the whole. > > Duane > > > On 9/27/09 2:35 AM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com> wrote: > > In my mind, composition facilitates reuse. > > The next question in this row is 'what is reuse?' I define service > reuse as the use of the service in the changed/new execution > context; otherwise, it is just a multiple use of the service (i.e. > exactly how the service was defined. This, BTW, leads to one more > issue (a chain of reaction): the execution context description has > to be a part of the Service Description, i.e. the service > definition for the consumers) > > - Michael > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com> > > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "James Odell" > > <email@jamesodell.com>, "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org" > > <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] > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:32:29 -0700 > > > > If this is the consensus, I am happy with this as long as we add a > > glossary term to denote that the composition does not necessarily > > preclude reuse (ie – independent lifecycles for the parts). > > > > D > > > > > > On 9/26/09 2:54 PM, "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com> wrote: > > > > I used term 'composite' only because this word has somehow become > > commonly used but its sense is certainly 'aggregate'. > > > > I am happy with '...independent and aggregate services...' while, > > IMO, 'composable' and 'independent' are not antonyms: and > > independent service may be composed of other services. Aggregate, > > in the contrast, is the service that depends on others. > > > > I remember related discussion about a year ago in one of the > > Telecoms; I started to use the term 'aggregate' since that time > > but was asked on several occasions what it meant. > > > > - Michael > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "James Odell" <email@jamesodell.com> > > > To: "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org" <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] > > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:22:54 -0400 > > > > > > > > > Additionally in UML ³composite aggregation², the > > composite object has > > > responsibility for the existence and storage of the composed objects > > > (parts). So can a composite service be thought of as having the > > > responsibility for the existence and storage of the composed objects > > > (parts)? I would say yes ‹ but is this always true? For > > > example a Process > > > Order service could defined as a SOAservice that has > > responsibility for the > > > existence for other first class services that are composed (e.g., Accept > > > order, Fill Order, Ship Order and Close Order). Here, the cmpositing > > > service could include service orchestration, as Duane suggests. > > > On the other hand, Could I have a service that is a ³taxonomic² > > > aggregation. > > > For example, a Process Payment service may simply consist of > > various kinds > > > of first class payment services, such as Cash Payment, Credit > > Card Payment, > > > Wire Transfer payment, etc). However, one could also argue > > that event this > > > could be thought of a composite, because it the responsibiliy for the > > > existence and storage of the composed services. However, this may or may > > > not nvolve orchestration ‹ only part whole. > > > > > > -Jim Odell > > > > > > > > > On 9/25/09 6:14 PM, "Duane Nickull" indited: > > > > > > > Via Aggregation. Aggregation is a UML pattern whereby the parts > > > > are ³used² by > > > > the whole. If th 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 ³part of² 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 > > > > ³reuse² not possible. > > > > > > > > I think aggregation is a better term, however the press and others have > > > > already gone with ³service composition² 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@starboune.com> > > > >> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday > > [was: [soa-rm-r] > > > >> 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 ean 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 erms or almost an oxymoron. > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Rex > > > >> > > > >> Duane Nickull wrote: > > > >>> > My take on this: > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2007/09/soa-anti-patterns-service-compositio > > > >>> n.html > > > >>> > > > > >>> > D > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On 9/25/9 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 hought 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 > > > >>>>> > > > cnnected 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 oe IMO) > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> > > > "Neither Business nor IT completely own govern, and manage > > > >>> > this SOA > > > >>>>> > > > Ecosystem. The SOA Eosystem must accommodate both sets of > > > concerns > > > >>>> > > for > > > >>>>> > > > t 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 > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 > > > > > > > > -- > An Excellent Credit Score is 750 > See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! > > > > -- > Come to Adobe MAX 2009 and sign up for the LiveCycle Bundle - > http://max.adobe.com/sessions/livecycle/?sdid=EUQZE > Twitter: duancechaos > > -- An Excellent Credit Score is 750 See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]