[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Definition of business
The problem is that "business" means (at least) two things:
- an organisational entity with a mission and a structure ("that business
has just opened a new office downtown...");
- a mission itself ("...that is the core business of this organisation....")
I would propose we use "enterprise" or "organisation" for the first, to
avoid confusion.
Peter
BTW: the glossary is being compiled now from the run through I'm making of
all posts (1071) and documents (30+) submitted. Where there is still
ambiguity, doubt, etc. I will signal this to Matt in my editor submission
-----Original Message-----
From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com]
Sent: 11 May 2005 17:47
Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
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]