[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Sub Comittee and/or User guide
Duane, This is exactly how I see things going, having sub committees formed to work on reference architectures. One thing I *do* want to be careful of, however, is commissioning any of these committees before the reference model is at least a committee specification. I do not want to split the TC's attention this early in the process, and I want to make sure that the subcommittees are towing the SOA-RM "party line"...which is impossible when the party platform is still in incubation. Thanks, Matt On 18-Apr-05, at 5:23 PM, Duane Nickull wrote: > All: > > I have read through the last batch of email. There are a couple of > things I would like to propose for comments. Please read this entire > email before replying. > > 1. I will concede that many members of the public will likely have the > same kinds of trouble interpreting a reference model vs. a reference > architecture vs a specific architecture as seems to be pervasive on > this list. If we have the problem in our context, it is likely to be > present outside of this list. > > 2. We cannot redefine what a "reference model" is or what it includes. > If we tried to change the industry definition of reference model to > one that has concrete items in it or things that are not part of SOA > (which is tricky since it is still undefined), it will not be a true > reference model and hence not accepted by industry. > 3. Service provider and service consumer are not part of a reference > model. They are roles visible only in a runtime or infrastructure > views of a specific architecture. To prove this point, please look > once again at the OSI reference model. It is a communications stack > RM yet does not contain notions of a message sender and message > receiver. > 4. We cannot mix abstract concepts and "things people can chew on" > (implying concrete items) in our work. Such does run adverse to > accepted architectural conventions. > > SOLUTION: > > One way forward is to probably create a sub committee to work on a > reference architecture for SOA. A Reference Architecture could be > developed in parallel to the reference model and is fair game to > illustrate things like security, consumers, providers, agents etc. It > is within our charter to do such. > > After reading through some older emails, I would assert that such a > thing is probably essential along with some sort of white paper or > user guide that explains the relationships between the RM, the RA and > other architecture. > > Reference Model > (is a guide for developing a) > [ Reference Architecture || * Architecture ] > > There are several people on this list who also have stated specific > needs for what they see in SOA. Perhaps this may be a good Sub > Committee (SC) consideration also. > Government Service Oriented Reference Architecture??? > etc. > > I can already see there are many of you who could lead such an effort > as a sub committee. > Comments? > > 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 > *********** >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]