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)


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 ***
>
>
>



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]