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] [Please indicate if you believe pulse check would bevaluable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA,etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together


Please note that there is a ballot in Kavi for this purpose.

-Matt

On 21-May-05, at 3:40 PM, john c hardin wrote:

> Yes
>
> ~~~~~~~~~
> john c hardin
> Chair, OASIS ebSOA Technical Committee
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ebsoa
> 313.279.1377 new *VONAGE* number
> mailto:john@crossconnections.ws
>
> "The new electronic interdependence recreates the world in the  
> image of a global village."
>
>     Marshall McLuhan, "Gutenberg Galaxy", 1962
>
>
> Derek C FU wrote:
>
>> Yes
>> ._________________________.
>> Derek Fu - I/T Architect
>> Software Group
>> 11/F, PCCW Tower, Taikoo Place, 979 King's Road, Quarry Bay, Hong  
>> Kong
>> mailto:FuDerek@hk1.ibm.com
>> Office +852 2825-6616 Fax +852 2825-0022 Mobile +852 9199-2060
>> Inactive hide details for "Chiusano Joseph"  
>> <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>"Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>
>>                         *"Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>*
>>                         05/20/2005 09:26 PM
>>
>> To
>>
>> <soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> cc
>>
>> 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_
>>                         <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.
>>                          >>>
>>                          >>>
>>                          >>>
>>                          >>>
>>
>
>



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