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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm message

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


Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Definition of "Service Consumer"


OK, I stand to get shot for shoddy vocabulary, but here's 
my 0.02...
Surely the only entity that binds with the service at "run 
time" (an instance of the service being provided) is an 
"agent", not the "end-user"? The user "binds" with a 
contract for the delivery of a service, and is not 
partiucularly interested with the technology of the 
service invocation or technological "instantiation" of 
that service.

This distinction would fit with the two-level model we 
discussed on call

User* ------- Contract ------- Service
Agent ------ Invocation ----- Service instance

* user in the UML sense, any human or other "actor" with 
an interface to a system.


Peter
___________________________________
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:21:35 -0400
  Don Flinn <flinn@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> Greg
> 
>Following the concept in the "Web Services Architecture" 
>specification
> we should should separate the owner (human), from the 
>agent that is
> defined in that spec as software.  This is implied in 
>your definition 2.
> The spec further divides the owner and agent into a 
>requester and
> provider.  
> 
> Putting those pieces together:
> 
> An Agent is a software program acting on behalf of an 
>owner. 
> (Note that there can be indirection in the control by 
>the owner.  For
> example, the owner might control the agent by means of 
>policy, directly
> invoke the agent, put control directly into the agent 
>code, etc.)
> 
> A Service Consumer is an agent that wishes to interact 
>with a service. 
> 
> I would lean more to the former spec's use of Requester 
>Agent rather
> than Service Consumer since the request might not be 
>successful and thus
> not consumed.
> 
> Symmetry seem to demand similar constructs on the 
>service side.
> 
> Don
> 
> On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 16:23 +0200, Gregory A. Kohring 
>wrote:
>> Matthew,
>> 
>> OK, here a fewer other choices which might be deemed 
>>more
>> "respectful"...
>> 
>> Service Consumer:
>> 
>> 1) End-user of a service.
>> 
>> 2) An agent which, acting on behalf of its owner, uses a 
>>service.
>> 
>> 3) An entity which utilizes a service
>> 
>> 4) An entity which consumes the product or information 
>>produced by a
>>     service.
>> 
>> 
>> Note all of these definitions depend upon the definition 
>>of the
>> term "service".  Have we agreed on this already? Perhaps 
>>we should
>> start there first...
>> 
>> 
>> -- Greg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
>> > I think services deserve respect, lets try not to 
>>exploit them :-)
>> > 
>> > Gregory A. Kohring wrote:
>> > 
>> >> Thomas,
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps one should use a somewhat broader definition 
>>which captures
>> >> the human user as well:
>> >>
>> >> Service Consumer: An entity which exploits a service.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -- Greg
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thomas Erl wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Now that we've decided on the term "service 
>>consumer" it may be 
>> >>> useful to formally define it. The term "consumer" is 
>>used by the WS-I 
>> >>> Basic Profile wherein it is simply defined as 
>>"Software that invokes 
>> >>> an instance."
>> >>>
>> >>> Thomas
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> > 
>> 
>> 
> -- 
> Don Flinn
> President, Flint Security LLC
> Tel: 781-856-7230
>Fax: 781-631-7693
> e-mail: flinn@alum.mit.edu
> http://flintsecurity.com
> 



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