[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Definition of "Service Consumer"
<Quote> My position is that we are describing IT Service-Oriented Architecture, not, for instance, a more traditional Plumbing or Aerospace Plumbing Service-Oriented Architecture. </Quote> Additional point: If, to carry out its mission and goals, an aerospace plumbing operation* could function more efficiently by being supported by systems and technologies that are architected according to service-oriented principles, then I believe that such an aerospace plumbing operation can benefit from the work that we are doing. *using "operation" in business operation terms, not WSDL terms Joe Joseph Chiusano Booz Allen Hamilton Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] > Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 10:49 AM > To: Matthew MacKenzie; Gregory A. Kohring > Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Definition of "Service Consumer" > > If by '"rigid" you mean UML, then, notwithstanding the > implicit agreement in the positions of my last post and > Matt's post, then I am in favor of a narrow definition within > the scope and context of IT per se. And, I do think we need > to either vote on or gain clear consensus for each our terms, > no matter how few there are, but in respect of how few they > should be and I definitely prefer the fewest possible to do > the job on a necessary and sufficient basis. So far I think > we are getting close to necessary, but remain quite a > distance from sufficient. To put it in Einsteinian aphorism, > we have it nearly as simple as possible, but I think that is > too simple to satisfy the "simple enough" test. So far I > think we are arriving at a necessary but insufficient level > of definition. > > My position is that we are describing IT Service-Oriented > Architecture, not, for instance, a more traditional Plumbing > or Aerospace Plumbing Service-Oriented Architecture. Nor are > we describing a First Order Philosophical Principle. > > In the information technology context, given the parameters > of fluid dynamics within the temperature ranges that support > human life as we know it, we would certainly have a welcome > ontological (taxonomical actually, IMO) slot for such > plumbing SOAs as the examples offered. > Gowever, those taxonomies would only come into play one or > two levels of abstraction below the Reference Model. However, > semantically and ontologically, I think we need to make our > work clearly applicable in an easily and clearly > comprehensible way, exactly as expressed in the > charter: for a non-technical audience. > > I just want our work to be fully grounded as opposed to > non-normatively tethered to the concrete. I don't see a hard > and fast separation between abstract and concrete that > doesn't flirt with irrelevance or court being dismissed out > of hand by either the commercial or academic communities. > > Ciao, > Rex > > At 9:08 AM -0400 4/8/05, Matthew MacKenzie wrote: > >Personally, I'm not game for votes on individual > definitions. I just > >want to reiterate my assertion that "invoke" is too narrow a > word here, > >given the discussion that took place originally over "requester" vs. > >"consumer". I'm still not convinced such a role is even > required to be > >defined in this document unless the consensus is to model > the RM in a > >"rigid" modeling language. > > > >-matt > >On 8-Apr-05, at 2:34 AM, Gregory A. Kohring wrote: > > > >> > >>Here is a summary of yesterdays proposals for defining the term > >>"Service Consumer": > >> > >>1) Software that invokes an instance, > >> > >>2) Software that uses a service instance, > >> > >>3) An agent that wishes to interact with a service, > >> > >>4) An agent that interacts with a service in order to > >> achieve a goal, > >> > >>5) An entity that binds with a service is playing the > >> role of service consumer, > >> > >>where the suggested definition of "agent" was: > >> > >>1) An Agent is a software program acting on behalf of an owner. > >> > >>(By substituting this definition in some of the above > suggestions you > >>can come up with yet more definitions of service consumer.) > >> > >> > >>Now, just out of curiosity, how do we proceed from here? > >>Do we vote on one of the suggested definitions? (This implies we > >>should vote on the definitions of all the terms to be used in the > >>final document.) Or do we leave it up to the editors to pick the > >>definition which best fits the style of writing being used > within the > >>final document? > >> > >> > >>-- Greg > >> > >> > >> > >>-- > >>============================================================ > ========== > >>G.A. Kohring > >>C&C Research Laboratories, NEC Europe Ltd. > >>============================================================ > ========== > >> > >-- > >Matthew MacKenzie > >matt@mac-kenzie.net > >* Read my blog! http://blog.tekni.ca/ > > > -- > Rex Brooks > President, CEO > Starbourne Communications Design > GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison > Berkeley, CA 94702 > Tel: 510-849-2309 >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]