[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)
This sent 5/10/2005, 10:11pm as part of the "interesting definition of SOA"
thread
>For your consideration, other definitions from a different project:
>
>A framework is a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that
>constitutes a way of viewing the current domain of interest. For example,
>a software framework may exist which is defined using object-oriented
>concepts and states that software built in this framework will have a user
>interface layer, a service layer, and a resource layer. The framework
>might also state the services will adhere to SOAP and WSDL descriptions
>for Web services. Microsoft defines the .NET Framework as a programming
>infrastructure for building, deploying, and running applications and
>services that use .NET technologies. Mac OS X includes a variety of
>application frameworks built on top of the traditional UNIX APIs.
>
>An architecture is a set of artifacts, i.e. principles, guidelines,
>policies, models, standards and processes, and the relationships between
>these artifacts, that guide the selection, creation, and implementation of
>solutions aligned with business goals. These artifacts are organized into
>a framework that a) communicates the salient components and properties of
>the architecture, and b) validates the completeness of the artifacts and
>their relationships.
>To continue the example in the framework definition, the business goals
>require transparent data access to any data resource; the architecture
>would specify that a General Data Access Service must be present and the
>requirements under which it must successfully support data access. Any
>implementation of this architecture could develop independent instances of
>the service as long as these instances were consistent with the
>architectural description.
>
>I didn't attempt reference model and you don't want to know what I said
>about enterprise architecture ;-)
>
>Ken
At 09:03 AM 5/12/2005, Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
>Ken,
>
>Would you mind repeating your definition of "framework"?
>
>-matt
>
>Ken Laskey wrote:
>
>>Matt,
>>
>>In a previous email, I sent a definition of "framework". How does RM
>>compare to framework? And if my framework definition works, does the
>>architecture definition (which was supposed to build on the framework
>>one) work too?
>>
>>Ken
>>
>>At 09:30 AM 5/11/2005, Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
>>
>>>In my way of thinking, a reference model is actually a form of
>>>architecture, although I have been straying away from portraying it in
>>>that light in order to help others understand the distinction.
>>>
>>>What form of architecture? I call it an "architectural framework".
>>>(for the sarcastic, you'll note that I am using two of the most overused
>>>words in our field here, but I feel they work.)
>>>
>>>In my world, and architecture must be implementable and should not
>>>contain too many undefined/undesigned component areas where
>>>engineers/developers can make grievous mistakes. On the other hand, an
>>>architectural framework is somewhat like a UML pallette you would find
>>>in Visio -- all of the concepts are represented on the pallette, and a
>>>trained practitioner knows how to arrange the concepts on her canvas to
>>>draw the picture. This reference model that we are writing is
>>>effectively the training material used to train practitioners.
>>>
>>>Is that clear, or have I added confusion?
>>>
>>>-Matt
>>>
>>>Chiusano Joseph wrote:
>>>
>>>><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
>>>><https://webmail.bah.com/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=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
>>>>***********
>>>
>>
>>--
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> / 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 ***
>>
>>
>
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ 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 ***
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]