[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, etc.:Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together
It just allowed me to vote. Rex At 10:09 AM -0700 5/20/05, Duane Nickull wrote: >Apoligies - the vote is not open until tonight. I guess it will >announce itself. > >Duane > >Duane Nickull wrote: > >>There is now a ballot set up to vote on this. I am not sure why it >>has not yet sent out a message announcing itself. >> >>All members who have attended 3 of the last 5 meetings are eligible >>to vote. This is relaxed from the requirement to be a voting member. >> >>Please go to Kavi under the ballots area and vite according to your >>preference. >> >>Thanks >> >>Duane >> >>Chiusano Joseph wrote: >> >>>Totals from responses so far: >>>Y: 6 >>>N: 1 (with additional information provided) >>>Joe >>>Joseph Chiusano >>>Booz Allen Hamilton >>>Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com <http://www.boozallen.com/> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From:* Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com] >>> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 12:09 PM >>> *To:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> *Subject:* RE: [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse >>> check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM >>> vs. RA, etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>> >>> Sure - everything you need to know is in: >>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/soa-rm/200505/msg00514.html >>> Joe >>> Joseph Chiusano >>> Booz Allen Hamilton >>> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com <http://www.boozallen.com/> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> *From:* Behera, Prasanta [mailto:pbehera@visa.com] >>> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 11:46 AM >>> *To:* Chiusano Joseph; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> *Subject:* RE: [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse >>> check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, >>> SOA, RM vs. RA, etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>> >>> I would like the mail to list the issues ("these" is not >>> clear). We had tons of email today and it is hard to catch up. >>> It will be nice if you can resend the mail specifying the issues >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> /Prasanta >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> *From:* Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com] >>> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 6:26 AM >>> *To:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> *Subject:* [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse >>> check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, >>> SOA, RM vs. RA, etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>> >>> Thanks Matt. >>> >>> TC members: If you believe that a "pulse check" to see where >>> we collectively stand on these fundamental issues would be >>> valuable (i.e. is our current RM depicting SOA or is it >>> depicting service orientation, what is SOA, etc.) please >>> indicate this asap. Please note that this is not asking what >>> is your view, but would a quick pulse check to get the current >>> overall TC view be valuable to our process moving forward. >>> >>> To make it easy: You can "reply all" to this e-mail with a >>> simply "Yes" (a pulse check would be valuable) or "No" (a >>> pulse check would not be valuable). Or even Y or N, to save >>> typing effort. ;) >>> >>> Silence will indicate indifference. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Joe >>> >>> Joseph Chiusano >>> >>> Booz Allen Hamilton >>> >>> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >>> <http://www.boozallen.com/> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:mattm@adobe.com] >>> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 9:15 AM >>> *To:* Chiusano Joseph >>> *Cc:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >>> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>> >>> Joe, >>> >>> This can play out in one of two ways: >>> >>> 1) Overwhelming interest by TC members on the email list makes >>> it obvious that discussion is required immediately. I've not >>> seen that yet. Could happen today. If I see that, I think I >>> can put up an informal poll because it would be obvious that >>> many folks think we need a "pulse check". >>> >>> 2) Your agenda request is noted by Duane when he gets this >>> message, and if (1) doesn't somehow resolve the issue, it can >>> be resolved at the next meeting. The issue probably shouldn't >>> be about the poll, the issue in this case should probably be >>> the subject of the poll. >>> >>> -Matt >>> >>> On 20-May-05, at 9:05 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks Matt - whom do I see to get this idea on the next >>> meeting agenda? Or if it is easier, I would like to please >>> make the request now that whoever creates the next agenda >>> includes this idea. >>> >>> Clarification: Would the vote ask whether or not this "pulse >>> check" should be done? Or would the pulse check itself act as >>> the vote? I am fine either way - just want to follow our >>> procedures. If we do the pulse check then as a TC member, I >>> accept, honor, and respect the results whatever they may be. >>> It's just the right now when I am asked about what this TC is >>> developing, all I can say is "we are not sure" because we do >>> not have consensus on what SOA is, what a reference model is, >>> etc. At least with this mechanism I will be able to say "our >>> consensus is that SOA is X", and "our consensus is that a >>> reference model is Y", etc. >>> >>> Not worried about heckling - after all, I used to do a comedy >>> show every Sat. night through the mid-to-late 80s with Jay >>> Mohr. One of us used to get heckled (although my "Newark, >>> Newark" song parody used to get good responses - sometimes;) >>> >>> Joe (An Italian-American who watches C-SPAN instead of Friends >>> after work) >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> >>> Joseph Chiusano >>> >>> Booz Allen Hamilton >>> >>> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >>> <http://www.boozallen.com/> >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:mattm@adobe.com] >>> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 7:36 AM >>> *To:* Chiusano Joseph >>> *Cc:* Duane Nickull; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> <mailto:soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org> >>> *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >>> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>> >>> Joe, >>> >>> 1. Get your idea on the next meeting agenda. >>> >>> 2. Attend said meeting. >>> >>> 3. Bring forward a motion, and ask for a eligible person to >>> second it. >>> >>> 4. It will be put to vote. >>> >>> Parliamentary process is wonderful, but you have to expect >>> lots of heckling and disagreement. >>> >>> -Matt (A Canadian who watches C-SPAN instead of Friends after >>> work) >>> >>> On 20-May-05, at 6:51 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> <Quote> >>> >>> This is the TC process at work. Can we please give it a chance? >>> </Quote> >>> >>> Please clarify why you believe that a TC member asking that we >>> poll the TC informally to gain clarification on issues that >>> are fundamental to the TC's mission is outside of the normal >>> TC process. >>> >>> Joe >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> *From:* Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >>> *Sent:* Thu 5/19/2005 11:27 PM >>> *Cc:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> <mailto:soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org> >>> *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >>> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>> >>> The current draft is a work in progress and we are actively >>> editing it >>> now. It will change to reflect TC consensus. What else do you >>> want? >>> This is the TC process at work. Can we please give it a chance? >>> >>> None of us have stated that our current draft is truly SOA, >>> nor should >>> we until we have TC consensus. >>> >>> Duane >>> >>> Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>> >>>>I would be very willing to take on documenting it, but there is a >>>>prerequisite that is missing, which was part of my message in this >>>>thread - and that is coming to agreement within the TC as >>> >>> whether our >>> >>>>current RM is truly SOA - which also has a prerequisite of >>> >>> coming to >>> >>>>aggrement within the TC on what we believe SOA is (is more than 1 >>>>service required to have SOA, are shared services a fundamental >>>>component, etc.). Our current draft states that SOA is a type >>> >>> of EA, and >>> >>>>we have already determined (I believe) that that is not the case. >>>> >>>>Kind Regards, >>>>Joseph Chiusano >>>>Booz Allen Hamilton >>>>Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >>>>>Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 11:08 PM >>>>>Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>>> >>> <mailto:soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org> >>> >>>>>Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >>>>>etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>>>> >>>>>Joseph: >>>>> >>>>>I will concur that the definition between RA and RM could use >>>>>documenting. Is that a task you may be willing to take on? >>>>> >>>>>Duane >>>>> >>>>>Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Duane, >>>>>> >>>>>>I would like to make a suggestion to help clear up the current >>>>>>division in our TC on some basic issues, which I believe is >>>>> >>> truly >>> >>>>>>inhibiting our ability to move forward in a unified way - >>>>> >>> and will >>> >>>>>>continue to do so unless we address it at this time. >>>>>> >>>>>>The most prominent division that I have perceived over the >>>>>> >>>>>course of >>>>> >>>>>>several weeks is: "If we are defining a reference model, >>>>> >>> what is it >>> >>>>>>for? Is it for a single service? (call this >>>>>> >>>>>"service-orientation") or >>>>> >>>>>>SOA?" IOW, "Is it SO-RM, or SOA-RM?" >>>>>> >>>>>>The second most prominent division that I have perceived >>>>> >>> over the >>> >>>>>>course of several weeks is: "Where is the line drawn between >>>>> >>> RM and >>> >>>>>>RA?". Last week I began a thread[1] on this question, and I >>>>>> >>>>>thank all >>>>> >>>>>>who contributed (Matt, Duane, Ken, Rex, Francis, any others >>>>>> >>>>>I missed). >>>>> >>>>>>However, I think we really need to drill down into this >>>>>> >>>>>question more >>>>> >>>>>>and have a crystal clear answer before we go any farther, >>>>>> >>>>>else run the >>>>> >>>>>>risk of creating an RM that cannot easily "bridge to" an RA. -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-849-2309
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]