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] Groups - Rough notes taken during the last ebSOA meeting. (ebSOA-Elements.pdf) uploaded


Duane,

You misunderstood my intent.  I was not suggesting a direct reference  
to WSDL but using this as an example of types of message-related  
capabilities the RM would support.  I'm looking for concrete examples  
from which to extract concepts and as examples against which to test  
the eventual RM for completeness.

Ken

On Apr 10, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Duane Nickull wrote:

> Ken:
>
> The reference model is abstract, while the WSDL is a concrete thing.   
> Look at the nature of other reference models such as the OSI stack.   
> OSI is a communications stack yet it also does not have messages or  
> message exchange patterns.  If there was one reference model that  
> should have those things, OSI should be it, yet it does not.
>
> The nature of a reference model is that it is abstract and does not  
> have many of the things that are explicit in concrete architectures.   
> It does not invalidate the MEP's of the WSDL 2.0 in any way (I am a  
> big fan of the WSDL 2.0 MEP's).
>
> Duane
>
> Ken Laskey wrote:
>
>> I have not yet gone through the rest of this thread (and several   
>> others) but it seems that while the message itself is not part of the  
>>  RM, the ability to create, transport, receive, and possibly   
>> save/archive the message is part of the RM.  Can we conceive of an  
>> SOA  without messages?  Consider the message exchange patterns (MEPs)  
>> that  are part of WSDL 2.0 for the types of message patterns people  
>> imagine.   Do we think these are accurate?  How does the RM  
>> acknowledge these?
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>> On Mar 30, 2005, at 7:32 PM, Duane Nickull wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Rebekah:
>>>
>>> Some comments inline:
>>>
>>> Metz Rebekah wrote:
>>>
>>>> All -
>>>> I have another 25 messages to go before I catch up with all the   
>>>> traffic
>>>> on the list, so I apologize if my comments are already outdated.
>>>>
>>> I would recommend reading Thomas's elegant summary - it may save you  
>>>  some time ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>> Respecting the service description, contract, and data model from
>>>> Duane's message - does you think that "all aspects of the service"
>>>> encompasses the service interface and the policy?  I like the use  
>>>> of  the
>>>> term service contract, but have seen several interpretations of the  
>>>>  term
>>>> ranging from semantics ("what is meant") to syntax (vis a vis the   
>>>> WSDL)
>>>> and also that the WSDL is the data model is the contract.  I would   
>>>> argue
>>>> that the contract is the same as the data model.  However, I'd have  
>>>> to
>>>> think a bit more to provide a convincing argument rather than simply
>>>> positing an idea.
>>>>
>>> The data model is the abstract concept of what data you will pass in  
>>>  and out of a service.  An open ended question is "does the data  
>>> model  include the notion of semantics?".  I would like to hear  
>>> comments back  on this matter.
>>>
>>>> Continuing into the message, I would disagree with the following:
>>>>
>>>>> If I build something and that is "Service Oriented"  
>>>>> architecturally,  does it have to have a "message"?  No - the  
>>>>> service itself has a  mechanism that allows a service consumer to  
>>>>> bind to it to invoke the  service but it doesn't actually have to  
>>>>> be invoked for it to be  "service oriented architecture".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that conceptually, a message exists.  <SNIP>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Try to think abstract.  If you think concrete - then the answer is   
>>> yes, however the reference model is not concrete.  No other  
>>> reference  models use messages by convention either.  If you find  
>>> one that is  well scrutinized and accepted by peers, please let me  
>>> know.
>>>
>>>> The mechanism by
>>>> which the consumer binds to the service and invokes it constitutes  
>>>> the
>>>> message.
>>>
>>> Conceptually - yes.  The "service" element of the SOA RM draft on  
>>> the  position paper includes the concept of a binding.  A physical  
>>> message  does not have to be sent.  When using the RM to write a  
>>> concrete SO  infrastructure architecture, one would recognize that a  
>>> message  protocol would likely be needed to be specified, along with  
>>> several  other items like security, potentially some sort of state  
>>> management  (like BPM), etc etc.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps a bit.
>>>
>>> Duane
>>>
>>> --  ***********
>>> Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. -   
>>> http://www.adobe.com
>>> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
>>> Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources  -   
>>> http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html
>>> ***********
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> -- ------------------
>> Ken Laskey
>> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305     phone:  703-883-7934
>> 7515 Colshire Drive                        fax:        703-883-1379
>> McLean VA 22102-7508
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> ***********
> Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. -  
> http://www.adobe.com
> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
> Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources  -  
> http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html
> ***********
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------------------
Ken Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305     phone:  703-883-7934
7515 Colshire Drive                        fax:        703-883-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508




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