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] Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions


+1

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Kenneth Laskey

MITRE Corporation, M/S H305              phone: 703-983-7934

7515 Colshire Drive                                    fax:        703-983-1379

McLean VA 22102-7508

 

From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 9:29 AM
To: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Agreed, but…

Unless the same ecosystem principles are valid and useful spanning from inter enterprise to inter galactic SOA implementations, we are missing the boat

 

From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 10:36 PM
To: mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Michael,

 

Let me clarify.  I don’t think an ecosystem really exists if there are not “enough” players.  I don’t expect there is a minimum size, and a lot may depend on how even a small group makes use of SOA principles.  So I don’t think there are different standards, but I question how effective a small, isolated community can be.  I may be wrong; my point is I suggest we not overtax ourselves in what are likely edge cases.

 

Ken

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Kenneth Laskey

MITRE Corporation, M/S H305              phone: 703-983-7934

7515 Colshire Drive                                    fax:        703-983-1379

McLean VA 22102-7508

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:38 PM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Ken, 

I assume that SOA RAF has to work in all SOA cases - of one or ten million services. SOA ecosystem rules (standard) should not depend on the number of services. I am very accurate with benefits - I see none, you see a lot.

 

Or you mean that SOA should have different standards for small and large deployment? This may be interesting to research.

 


I'm certainly for "
concentrate on what is shared as part of a service interaction". This simplifies many things and can be objectively distinguished.

 

Now, we are dangerous.

 

- Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
To: mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 9:53 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

Well, Michael, with agreement getting that close, we could be dangerous.  See below.

 

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 3:07 PM
To: Laskey, Ken; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

I feel, Ken we about 9 to 10 out of 10 have a match now (Ohh)

 

 If a service can be used in the ecosystem, the service is public è not sure yet: if service provider has produced a service exclusively for particular consumer, is it public or private? I cannot deny such service though it is not dedicated to access by arbitrary consumers. So, I do not know. We are saying that all services better be registered in public Registries to be available to wider audience and this is the Best Practice. Can we, in this case say that there may be private Service Registries and private services will be registered in there? I do not know.

 

Private services in a private registry sounds like a walled off ecosystem.  As with people who talk about having a cloud with three private services, there are times you don’t see the benefits if the scale is too small.  In the limit of one private service for one private consumer, we have limited the situation to one where I just don’t care.  My perspective tends to a large, heterogeneous ecosystem.


A particular use of the service may include confidential information and the values exchanged as part of the interaction may be private, but the fact that information is exchanged when using the service is public. è more agree than not. See my comments above: I can imagine a VPN and, in this case, the fact that information is exchanged may be also private. Am I correct?

 

So we get back to if you limit the problem to a point where your use of SOA principles is to say SOA, then I really don’t care if I cover you or not.  I’m not interested in an ecosystem of one.

 

Some subset of results are RWE as defined as changes in shared state. è more agree than not. Chris has found a sharing/shared state in between consumer and service within a service interaction. That is, we have a change in the shared state that is a part of RWE AND the shared state that that is not.

 

It would seem if I have RWE, then in the world where that is visible I also have the shared state that changed because that is how I perceive the RWE.  Things happen that are not visible to the ecosystem.  Maybe the answer is to avoid trying to draw a thin red line between public and private and just concentrate on what is shared as part of a service interaction.

 

To be shared, the knowledge that these states exist is public but the actual changes, i.e. the “values” during a given use, may be private è agree

 

- Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
To: mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 6:13 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

accessible with no restrictions”.  So, if the information is available as a 7 TB download that would be cut off by most providers, is it still public?  If we require someone to leave an email address, is it still public?  If the information is owned by someone and anyone who is willing to pay a nominal access fee to cover costs can access it, is it still public?  I expect we will see much in the way of such debates.

 

Back to our SOA ecosystem.  If a service can be used in the ecosystem, the service is public.  A particular use of the service may include confidential information and the values exchanged as part of the interaction may be private, but the fact that information is exchanged when using the service is public.  Some subset of results are RWE as defined as changes in shared state.  To be shared, the knowledge that these states exist is public but the actual changes, i.e. the “values” during a given use, may be private.

 

Ken

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:04 PM
To: Laskey, Ken; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Yes, it is definitely public because it is the status of the thing , not the status of potential consumers. At least, this is the exact definition in the UK (Freedom of Information Act in absence of Library of Congress). Public knowledge is public not because everybody know it (like Merriam-Webster Dictionary) but because it is available and accessible with no restrictions.  

I do not think the everything is private even in the limit: service provider is a public entity, Service Description document is public by nature while Service Contract may be public or private depending on the agreement while the default state is private. 

 

I seriously think that we have to take the viewpoint when define public/private: relationship of all things in the ecosystem to the ecosystem is public for the ecosystem. If we look at anything from this viewpoint, we can define and explain all things even those that are private by nature like intent and willingness. If we take a viewpoint of any entity inside the ecosystem onto another entity inside the ecosystem, it may be public or private. For example, an intent of a consumer to invoke a service is a private thing while the fact of invocation itself may be (as default) a public thing since the service registry is public. And so on.

 

As I said before, with current definition of 'private', it will be next to impossible to approach Business with SOA ecosystem.

 

- Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
To: mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 3:46 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

I believe your argument fails at the other extreme.  Is something public if it is accessible but lots of potential users don’t know it exists or how to get to it?  By your definition, if circumstances limit access, then it is private and, in the limit, everything is private.

 

Ken

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 4:29 AM
To: Laskey, Ken; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

If so (I disagree with this explanation of public), what is private? What could be private at all? 

 

If the thing belongs to SOA ecosystem, everything is public for the ecosystem. I accept this. But it may be not public inside the ecosystem for some of its elements and, in this case, it is private in the ecosystem.

 

Some internal Corporate Policies are private in the market but 'public' inside the corporation. In the country, all corporate internals must be accessible (public) by the government but they may be non-accessible for other corporations. 

 

We are talking absolutely trivial things. I am confused.

 

- Michael 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
To: mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 1:39 am
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

Your getting the book and you now owning the book are public.  The book itself is a book.  You writing your name on your book when you receive it is private.

 

Ken

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 5:02 PM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Agree, "The ... delivery is RWE for anyone involved" but the book itself is not a part of this RWE because it is my private thing.

 

Or, there are no 'private' and 'non-shared' things in SOA ecosystem?

 

- Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
To: mpoulin@usa.com; 'Bashioum, Christopher D' <cbashioum@mitre.org>; boris.lublinsky@navteq.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Wed, Jan 19, 2011 9:55 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

The book delivery is RWE for anyone involved for which the book delivery or some part of the process is of interest.  The delivery car amortization is RWE for those dealing with the car financing.  Both are RWE, although likely unrelated, for the business entity delivering the book.

 

Ken

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:44 PM
To: Bashioum, Christopher D; Laskey, Ken; boris.lublinsky@navteq.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Chris, why do you think that appearance of the book in the postal package (i.e. nobody knows it is the book) at your doorstep is a RWE (" if I want a book to show up on my doorstep, I may need to go through several interactions or method calls to get that RWE")? According to Ken, the delivery car amortization is the RWE, but the book is the private Result of the service known to you - customer - and to the service only, i.e. it is not a RWE.

 

If RWE includes only public/shared things - we are diving into absurd, don't we? So, if it is me who does not see the forest behinds the trees then, probably, these trees are Sequia while the forest comprises only Karelian Birch

- Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Bashioum, Christopher D <cbashioum@mitre.org>
To: Laskey, Ken <klaskey@mitre.org>; 'Lublinsky, Boris' <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>; mpoulin@usa.com <mpoulin@usa.com>; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org <soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wed, Jan 19, 2011 8:52 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

I think there are some subtleties that still need to be teased out.  In order to try and get to the concept, I will speak very concretely.

 

First, a given RWE is not necessarily triggered by a method call.  turns out that a sequence of successful method calls will likely be necessary, and different sequences may result in different "aspects?" of a given service.  So, if I want a book to show up on my doorstep, I may need to go through several interactions or method calls to get that RWE, all of which may be part of the same interface.  This is what Ken was referring to when he spoke of process model on the TC call today. 

 

So ... I think I invoke a service, and invoking a service may be accomplished by sending multiple messages to multiple "methods" in a service interface.  Each message to each method may trigger a corresponding action, but the RWE I'm after is the end result of the aggregate of the actions.  Note that an error code, in my mind, is not a RWE, it is an error and I didn't get the RWE. 

 

In some cases, the information returned is the RWE.  Using the calculator example, let's suppose the calculator has 3 methods.  The first takes operand a, the second takes operand b, and the third takes the operator (+, -, * or /).  The RWE I want is the result of the aggregate of the method calls.  If I get an error code because I send a letter instead of a number for one of the operands, I won't get the RWE.  The RWE is in this case the return of information.

 

One could suggest that RWE is, at least in part, in the eye of the consumer.

 

Another thought ... I think we have to be careful in our conceptual model to keep distinct the difference  between a service and a "good" vs. "bad" service.  So ... if I design a "bad" service, is it still a service?   This pokes at the essence of what a service "is".

 

As for the interface, it turns out that message processing logic is more than an interface.  The RM tries to distinguish the message processing logic from the business logic.  You really need both to have a service.  If you have a great set of business logic, but nobody can get to it, you don't have a service.  If you have a great set of message processing logic, but no business logic, you don't have a service. 

 

I really liked Jeff's summary on the TC today, where he talked about interaction being all throughout the lifecycle and ecosystem, but "service activity" begins at the point that the consumer is actually invoking the service.  The interactions must occur prior to the activity, and is where the ecosystem stuff comes into play.  In which case, the service action must take into account the activity and process models of the service that the RM points out. 

 

 

From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 3:10 PM
To: 'Lublinsky, Boris'; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Is there any major damage by my using red wording inline below?

 

As for importance of RWE, it is what someone wants and why they use service.  The RWE of a calculator is the result it displays.

 

Ken

 

From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:56 PM
To: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Let’s try differently:

·         In accepted terms a service has an interface(s) – Service interface

·         Service interface has method(s) – Service methods.  Service interface defines message exchange with service

·         A service method (not a service) can be invoked.  Message to service Interface triggers service action through corresponding private actions

·         Service method provides an execution result.  Triggering a service action lead to results.

·         An execution result can either change a service state or return an error  Public  Results are changes in states or a return of information

·         A change in a service state may (or not) produce RWE  Changes to public states produce RWE

So far this is excepted set of thing that most of practitioners will relate to

Now here is a list of questions:

·         How is service action relates to the above? is it a service method invocation?

·         Why do we care so much about RWE? A calculator is a useful service with no RWE

 

From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 1:41 PM
To: mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] RE: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Let’s try it this way:  a service action (by which I mean an action from the Action Model) results in the change of public and possibly private states.  The change in public states is RWE, the change in private states is unknown to the SOA ecosystem unless these become public at a later time.

 

Ken

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 2:12 PM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm] Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Ken,

 

I gave this example as an evidence of inconsistency and brocken/forgotten dependency between definitions.

 

I have to be more accurate: "then we have said that that result is outside the scope of our consideration" is not the same as "we just said it is not what we are considering under RWE". The latter I is true if RWE is public only BUT the former may be understood as that private service result is out of the scope of RAF! This I cannot agree with because BOTH types of result belong to the SOA ecosystem.

 

Service Action produces private (always) and public (sometimes) results and only the public one is RWE. If you agree with this statement, than the purpose of the service is to produce Result whether public or private, or both.

 

 

 

- Michael

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>
To: mpoulin@usa.com; peter@peterfbrown.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Wed, Jan 19, 2011 6:49 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

Michael,

 

I agree with most of your points, except the final one on RWE.  Someone may use a service to satisfy some private need but if the result is only known privately, then we have said that that result is outside the scope of our consideration.  We didn’t say the private result didn’t occur, we just said it is not what we are considering under RWE.

 

Ken

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Kenneth Laskey

MITRE Corporation, M/S H305              phone: 703-983-7934

7515 Colshire Drive                                    fax:        703-983-1379

McLean VA 22102-7508

 

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 1:24 PM
To: peter@peterfbrown.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

 

Before going through details and definitions, I think we have to agree on the a few principles.

 

Since RAF is about SOA ecosystem and we agreed that this one includes both business and technology then:

 

1) we cannot operate with definitions from RM with no changes because RM did not considered ecosystem. However, the changes of RM definitions should not deny the original definitions but may modify/extend them for the new context - ecosystem

 

2) all definitions we use have to be either meaningful/"interepretable" in both Business and Technology or we have explicitly identify the scope of the definition and justify that it does not work in the entire ecosystem ( in this case we will never confuse SOA-based system with 'just'/technical system

 

3) we have to draw a relationship/dependency lines (like in Value Networks) between our definitions to see consistency and influence between them

This better be not in a table format but in a map format. For example, in one place we say that service purpose is to provide a RWE; in another place we say that RWE is only shared/pubic thing; this leads to the conclusion that the purpose of service is to provide only shared/pubic thing, which is incorrect.

 

 

If we can agree on these principles and approach, we can eliminate a lot of unnecessary discussions 

 

- Michael

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter F Brown <peter@peterfbrown.com>
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Sent: Wed, Jan 19, 2011 6:07 am
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Comparison of definitions

As promised, attached is a comparison of the terms defined in the 28 July 2010 draft alongside the definitions used in the latest draft (in Excel and .ods formats)

As you will see, there are precious few instances of where the definitions match exactly, although in many cases it was more a case of cleaning up the wording (particularly to conform with standards for definitions, eg ISO 1087) than actually changing the definition.

 

Regards,

Peter

 

Peter F Brown

Independent Consultant

Transforming our Relationships with Information Technologies

Web         www.peterfbrown.com

Blog          pensivepeter.wordpress.com

Twitter     @pensivepeter

P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA

Tel: +1.310.694.2278

Tel: +1.310.694.2278

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


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.

smime.p7s



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