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] Reference Model vs. Reference Architecture (Road Map)


Title: Re: [soa-rm] Reference Model vs. Reference Architecture (Road Map)
<Quote>
I would also pick Matt's brain on this subject.  He is far more
knowledgeable since he lives in this world every day.
</Quote>
Thanks Duane - that all makes sense. Matt, I for one would be interested in hearing anything you'd like to add please.
 
Joe
 

Joseph Chiusano

Booz Allen Hamilton

Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com



From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com]
Sent: Tue 5/10/2005 8:35 PM
Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Reference Model vs. Reference Architecture (Road Map)

Joseph:

I am going to take a try at this. Please forgive this next sentence:

"A reference model is a model while a reference architecture is an
architecture. "

Okay - so what does that really mean (other that I couldn't find
appropriate words)?  Not an easy question to answer.

There are multiple differences you can state such as "One is
implement-able, the other is not".  A reference architecture does tend
to be more generic than most use cases would require and would still
need to be specialized further for a particular set of requirements.

Reference architecture is sort of a proof of concept. Individual
requirements and implementations  may vary, but with the
data and guidelines from such reference implementations the system
designer can make more informed decisions.  A reference architecture
also may force you to consider things the RM does not delve into.  The
RM for building a house may have a notion of a bathroom and also a
kitchen.  The reference model states you have to have one instance of
each to fulfill the functional requirements of providing a habitat for a
human being, but does not show a level of detail of how you could build
a house having both.

The reference architecture for a house would delve into how plumbing
gets from the source/target to both the bathroom and the kitchen, as
well as a documented layout that shows how they are connected and what
other common touchpoints and infrastructure they share.  It is a more
specific design that can also be further specialized.  It forces someone
architecting another house to consider the same question and perhaps
even shows them a solution paradigm (example - hide the pipes in the
wall).  This also hints at ways of implementing things that are
optimized (hiding pipes in the wall is better than running them outside
the house in climates where they may freeze).

The Reference Architecture for this alleged house can also be modified
for someone who owns property that is on a 10 degree slope or is not
connected to a city water and sewage system (let's not get into those
details).  It may also further optimize the house's orientation to
optimize it for natural sunlight and views via windows.

The order of abstraction is as follows:

1. Meta models and meta conventions(ADL's and notions such as patterns
of pipes and filters, stacks, etc.)
2. Reference Models
3. Reference Architectures
4. Specific Architectures.

There is of course, not 100% consensus on this subject and even
something as simple as a definition of architecture itself has proven to
be very difficult.

I would also pick Matt's brain on this subject.  He is far more
knowledgeable since he lives in this world every day.

Duane
Duane


Chiusano Joseph wrote:

> I think it is very important that at some point we include in our spec
> the necessary guidance for users of our spec to move from our
> reference model to a reference architecture, and perhaps beyond.

> I have seen so many cases in which the terms "reference model" and
> "reference architecture" have been used interchangeably (and sometimes
> in the same resource!) that I am no longer crystal clear on the
> similarities/differences between the 2. I know that there has been
> preliminary discussion that reference model != reference architecture.

> Can someone please provide a clear distinction between the 2, and how
> we envision our RM "flowing" into an RA?

> Thanks,
> Joe

> Joseph Chiusano
> Booz Allen Hamilton
> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com <http://www.boozallen.com/>



--
***********
Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
Chair - OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model Technical Committee -
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=soa-rm
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]