[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Definition of business
John: Thank you - that is more elegantly stated that the way I wrote that question. Anyone care to post an opinion? Duane John Harby wrote: >What value does it add to use 'business' as opposed to some more generic term? > >On 5/11/05, Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com> wrote: > > >>Ken: >> >>I still think this may weight in as too specific and constrictive. The >>gist seems to be the "the activities undertaken to accomplish goals", >>regardless of the the type of entity owning or operating the IT. >> >>For sake of clarity, can we not use the term "business"? Or does anyone >>believe we absolutely need to use that word. >> >>Duane >> >>Ken Laskey wrote: >> >> >> >>>But do we also need to cover >>> >>>business: the goals expressed by an organization and the activities >>>undertaken to accomplish those goals >>> >>>Ken >>> >>>At 08:31 AM 5/11/2005, Peter F Brown wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Duane: >>>> >>>>I take Martin's point but there is a difference between the >>>>"business" as an >>>>organisational entity; and "business" as the work/mission that the >>>>entity >>>>undertakes. I would prefer "enterprise" or "organisation", but could >>>>livewith "business" provided there is a clear definition in the >>>>glossary as >>>>you suggest. >>>> >>>>If "business" it is to be, then I'd propose for the glossary: >>>> >>>>"Business: any organisation, enterprise or undertaking, whether >>>>for-profit, >>>>voluntary or governmental in nature, with a particular mission and >>>>structure" >>>> >>>>Peter >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >>>>Sent: 11 May 2005 04:24 >>>>Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Why do we need SOA? (proposal for Introduction >>>>text) >>>> >>>>Martin: >>>> >>>>Yes - I know in our current context it is implicitly understood >>>>however I do >>>>want to keep our focus a bit strict about this to ensure that when >>>>someone >>>>picks up this RM 5 years from now it is still pretty clear. If there >>>>is a >>>>term that is not necessary to use that may cast ambiguity, we should >>>>probably error on the side of safety. >>>> >>>>If this becomes as popular as the OSI stack, we have to strive to >>>>make sure >>>>that 10 years from now people don't discard it because it only >>>>applies to >>>>business. >>>> >>>>Perhaps we should define it in the glossary if we did keep it in. >>>> >>>>Duane >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Smith, Martin wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Duane - - I wouldn't lose sleep over the term "business." We (in >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Government) use it all the time as synonymous with "mission". We >>>>talk about >>>>"business case", "business value", "business impact", "business >>>>owner" and >>>>"business process." It often is used to contrast with "non-business" >>>>functions or considerations like "support" or "infrastructure" or >>>>"administrative" or "compliance". >>>> >>>> >>>>>Martin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>________________________________ >>>>> >>>>>From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >>>>>Sent: Tue 5/10/2005 12:05 PM >>>>>Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Why do we need SOA? (proposal for Introduction >>>>>text) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I would object to any statement or notion that made SOA only SOA in the >>>>>context of 'business', however I think I understand the intent of the >>>>>statement and agree. Business is one type of user. Department of >>>>>Homeland Security is not a business yet they ill have SOA (at least >>>>>Martin hasn't tried to sell me anything yet ;-) >>>>> >>>>>Perhaps we could re-state it as an IT need, written in a way that >>>>>speaks to business and government users. This is harder than it >>>>>appears and I failed at it miserably but would love to hear your >>>>> >>>>> >>>>guys take. >>>> >>>> >>>>>Something like (but not) this: >>>>> >>>>>"SOA is an architectural model developed to enable those who build and >>>>>maintain IT systems to repurpose components rapidly for new >>>>>functionality. This enables them to respond quickly and in an >>>>>economically efficient manner to new requirements" >>>>> >>>>>Does that make sense? >>>>> >>>>>Duane >>>>> >>>>>Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Sally, >>>>>> >>>>>>I like your comment regarding SOA being a response for business, and I >>>>>>believe it is completely true. A general question for us: Since we are >>>>>>approaching SOA from the technical perspective (at least that is my >>>>>>understanding), wouldn't it be out of our scope to refer to the >>>>>>business aspects of SOA (i.e. that SOA encapsulates business services >>>>>>in....etc. etc.)? >>>>>> >>>>>>Joe >>>>>> >>>>>>Joseph Chiusano >>>>>>Booz Allen Hamilton >>>>>>Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com <http://www.boozallen.com/> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>>>> From: Sally St. Amand [mailto:sallystamand@yahoo.com] >>>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 9:17 PM >>>>>> To: Smith, Martin; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Why do we need SOA? (proposal for >>>>>> Introduction text) >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>>> I like your thoughts and agree that SOA is a response to the >>>>>> characteristics of the internet that you list. I also think SOA is >>>>>> a response for business. >>>>>> We need to answer your question, otherwise SOA will be ( or is >>>>>> already ) viewed as a marketing ploy >>>>>> See additional thoughts below. >>>>>> Sally >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Smith, Martin" <Martin.Smith@DHS.GOV> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> List - - >>>>>> >>>>>> I sent essentially this same message in the thread "[soa-rm] >>>>>> When Is An SOA Really An SOA?" a while back, but got no >>>>>> response. Thought I'd try again to see if no-one noticed it or >>>>>> no-one liked it . . . >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm proposing we include something like the following in the >>>>>> Introduction. As several people have observed, we all tended >>>>>> to jump right in to the details of "what is an SOA" without >>>>>> nailing down the answer to the "why should I [the reader] >>>>>> care?" question. As we learned in the f2f discussion, many of >>>>>> us on the TC care because it's our job to explain to others >>>>>> why we all seem to think we need this 'SOA' thing (other than >>>>>> that it keeps being in the news!) I'm guessing that if we can >>>>>> understand why SOA has become a buzzword, we'll clarify the >>>>>> "essential definition" question. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, here's what I think is driving SOA: >>>>>> >>>>>> "The SOA concept has emerged in response to the need for an >>>>>> approach to application architecture that is well adapted to >>>>>> the I! nternet environment. >>>>>> >>>>>> SOA is a strategy that organizes an enterprises functionality >>>>>> as services that can be aggregated and/or reused in order to >>>>>> achieve business goal(s). To take advantage of services over >>>>>> the internet there has to be the ability to understand, >>>>>> discover, combine and use the services that reside within the >>>>>> enterprise or anywhere on the internet. >>>>>> >>>>>> The Internet has revolutionized personal communications with >>>>>> e-mail, and "B-to-C" transactions with the World-Wide Web. >>>>>> Following the exploitation path of other technologies, the >>>>>> Internet may be expected to have a similar revolutionary >>>>>> effect on "B-to-B" transactions - - automating >>>>>> system-to-system exchanges - - and this domain may eventually >>>>>> be several times larger in scale that the "B-to-C" space. >>>>>> >>>>>> The characteristics of the Internet environment to which the >>>>>> SOA concept responds are: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Multiple management domains.--Business or other entities >>>>>> "on the 'Net" each have their own set of policies and >>>>>> procedures, and they are legal peers so there is little or no >>>>>> "top down governance" in the environment; >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. Heterogeneous technologies, semantics and processes; >>>>>> 3. A very large and dynamic "marketplace" of potential service >>>>>> providers and consumers.--Unlike the environment within a >>>>>> single organization, there may be many alternative providers >>>>>> of a computing service, and available services may change on a >>>>>> minute-by-minute basis; >>>>>> >>>>>> 4. Lack of standard context.--Within a single organization, >>>>>> there is normally a body of "well-known" information about >>>>>> what resources are available, how they may be obtained, what >>>>>> standards or conventions they follow, specific interface >>>>>> details, reliability of the resource, payment requirements, if >>>>>> any, etc. In the environment of a single computer, the >>>>>> unknowns are even fewer. Because of the size and diversity of >>>>>> the Internet, obtaining this information is a much larger >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>problem. >>>> >>>> >>>>>> 5. Lack of infrastructure services.--The Internet provides >>>>>> some basic services, but on a "best-efforts" basis. Thus >>>>>> issues like quality-of service and security require must be >>>>>> addressed more explicitly than in single-computer or >>>>>> local-network environments. >>>>>> >>>>>> Application architectures that call themselves "SOA" provide a >>>>>> solution to these issues of the Internet environment. There is >>>>>> nothing to prevent implemen! ting an SOA within a local >>>>>> network, on a single computing platform, or even in a >>>>>> non-technical environment like a human household, but the need >>>>>> for SOA is driven by the opportunity for exploiting the >>>>>> worldwide connectivity provided by the Internet." >>>>>> >>>>>> Martin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: John Harby [mailto:jharby@gmail.com] >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 12:05 PM >>>>>> To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] When Is An SOA Really An SOA? >>>>>> >>>>>> This seem to be an issue for defining "Reference Model". Does >>>>>> this >>>>>> reference model provide a litmus test for architectures to >>>>>> determine >>>>>> whether or not they follow SOA? >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5/5/05, Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>>>>> > This question has been on my mind for quite some time, and I >>>>>> would like now >>>>>> > to put it in the context of our in-process RM. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > In the past, I have pondered the following more specific >>>>>> question (please ! >>>>>> > note that this is all scoped to Web Services-based SOA for >>>>>> ease of >>>>>> > explanation): >>>>>> > >>>>>> > If I have 2 Web Services that communicate, do I have an SOA? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > We can say "certainly not!". One can do point-to-point >>>>>> integration with Web >>>>>> > Services just as easily (to a certain degree) as without, >>>>>> with redundant Web >>>>>> > Services rather than shared Web Services (a violation of one >>>>>> of the >>>>>> > foundational tenets of SOA, which is shared services). >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Now let's say that we have 2 Web Services that each conform >>>>>> to the SOA >>>>>> > Architectural Model in Figure 1 of our most recent draft. >>>>>> There is a data >>>>>> > model, a policy, a contract, etc. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Add to that our definition of SOA on line 470, in which we >>>>>> (correctly) state >>>>>> > that SOA is a form of Enterprise Architecture, which (at >>>>>> least in my mind) >>>>>> > implies enterprise-level benefits. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Q: Given the last scenario above (2 Web Se! rvices that each >>>>>> conform to the >>>>>> > SOA Architectural Model ) and our definition of SOA: Is this >>>>>> scenario >>>>>> > large-scale enough that it *really* meets our definition? >>>>>> IOW, how >>>>>> > large-scale does an "instance" that conforms to our RM have >>>>>> to be to yield >>>>>> > benefits on an enterprise scale? Do we need to stipulate >>>>>> something regarding >>>>>> > this for our RM? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Joe >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Joseph Chiusano >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Booz Allen Hamilton >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Visit us online@ 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 >>>>>*********** >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>-- >>>>*********** >>>>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 >>>>*********** >>>> >>>> >>>-- >>> >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> / Ken >>>Laskey \ >>> | MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 | >>> | 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 | >>> \ McLean VA 22102-7508 / >>> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>>*** note: phone number changed 4/15/2005 to 703-983-7934 *** >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>-- >>*********** >>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 >>*********** >> >> >> >> > > -- *********** 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]