OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm-ra message

[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] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]


Title: FW: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]

In this case this is absolutely fine. Composability is on the execution level – not lifecycle

 

From: James Odell [mailto:email@jamesodell.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:41 AM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: FW: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] p ositioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]

 

Mike,

Perhaps I chose poorly with the term “responsibility”.  
First, I can imagine Accept order, Fill Order, Ship Order and Close Order are services that an be requested and provided in their own right.
Second, I can imagine that a a more coarse-grained service is also registered that could — if so request — choreograph the finer grained services.  

In this way, a requester may cheese to limit its request to a Fill Order Service or request the whole choreographed service.  Also, I imagine that the whole choreographed service could be thought of as aggregating the finer-grain services under a single physical “aggregated” umbrella, called Process order.  So, I do not really mean "responsibility for the existence" -- only a whole part relationship.  

Cheers,
Jim


------ Forwarded Message
From: Mike Poulin <mpoulin@usa.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:27:48 -0500
To: "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>, James Odell <email@jamesodell.com>, <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]

James,
my answers are in a bit different angle than Boris' ones.
 
You say "For example a Process Order service could defined as a SOA service 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) ." If you really mean "responsibility for the existence" then I would not recognise Accept order, Fill Order, Ship Order and Close Order as services. They are rather functions of the Process Order Service or, as you suggested further, because they do not meet, at least, two principles of service orientation - Reusability and Autonomicy.
 
The problem is not in how they are involved into collaboration - via orchestration or not , the problem is in whether they exist as services on their own or as components of something else. BTW, to orchestrate something it is not necessary to use BPML or services. Traditional interaction between components in the Command or Chain of Command Patterns, or Mediator Pattern is an orchestration as well.
 
Returning back to your example, I would say that to satisfy the concept of aggregation (by Duane/UML), your phrase might be modified a bit and sound like this: "Process Order service could defined as a SOA service that has responsibility for the engaging/utilisation of . other first class services that are composed (e.g., Accept order, Fill Order, Ship Order and Close Order) together to deliver the result of the Process Order service"
 
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lublinsky, Boris"
To: "James Odell" , 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: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:43:31 -0500

I think that there is a huge difference between composite objects and composite services. The difference is in the fact, that unlike object, an instance of the service is never explicitly created. Service is a singleton (load-balanced, etc), which always exists, while an object instance is explicitly created for interaction.
So service composition/aggregation is only on the interaction, not lifecycle level
 

From: James Odell [mailto:email@jamesodell.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 2:23 PM
To: 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]

Additionally in UML “composite aggregation”, 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 SOA service 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 compositing service could include service orchestration, as Duane suggests.
On the other hand, Could I have a service that is a “taxonomic” 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 responsibility for the existence and storage of the composed services.  However, this may or may not involve 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 “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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >
>     > To: "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com> >, "Mike
>     Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> >, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >
>     > > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> >, "Lublinsky, Boris"
>     > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com> >, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >
>     > > > To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> >, "Lublinsky, Boris"
>     > > <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/boris.lublinsky@navteq.com> >, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com>
>     > > > > Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com>
>     > > > > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com>
>     > > > > Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ,
>     > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com> ;
>     Lublinsky, Boris
>     > > > > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com> ; Lublinsky, Boris
>     > > > > Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     > > > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ; > > >
>     > > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     > > > >> > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com>
>     > > > > >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/rexb@starbourne.com>
>     > > > > >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com> ;
>     > soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com>  [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] Sent: >
>     > > >>>>> > Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:31 AM
>     > > > > >>>>> To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/mpoulin@usa.com>  To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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 <http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/mail/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!
<http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;216722518;39159097;q?http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5 >


------ End of Forwarded Message



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]