RE: [soa-rm] David Linthicum Says: "ESB versus Fabric.Stop It!"

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

I do consider a single service with the service consumer to be SOA (I
think I mentioned this in an e-mail about a week or 2 ago as an answer
to a question that Duane posed), but I realize that others may not feel
the same way. Even if the majority agree that this consitutes SOA, I was
suggesting that our RM may be more effective if it addressed multiple
services. 

That is, we are producing a product - and I believe (IMHO) it is our
mission to produce the most effective product possible. So it's not just
a question of providing the minimum possible - but the minimum required
to be most effective.

Joe

Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregory A. Kohring [mailto:kohring@ccrl-nece.de] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 10:23 AM
> To: Chiusano Joseph
> Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] David Linthicum Says: "ESB versus 
> Fabric.Stop It!"
> 
> I am not sure I understand what you are driving at here.
> 
> Each and every service should be constructed according to the 
> principles of an SOA. (And it is exactly those principles 
> which we are trying to elucidate in this TC.)  At present, 
> most of the b2c business models consider selling solitary 
> services to the consumer; i.e., their world view consists of 
> a single service and multiple consumers.  By constructing 
> their service using SOA principles, they enable someone 
> (hopefully themselves) to build, at a later date, new 
> services on top of the existing service.
> 
> Now, would you not consider the system consisting of the one 
> initial service plus the many consumers an SOA?  Why would 
> you wait for the emergence of the second service before 
> calling it an SOA?
> If the first service was constructed correctly, the potential 
> for adding additional services is clearly given, yet you 
> would not consider this an SOA until that potential was realized?
> 
> 
> Perhaps I have misunderstood what it is you are trying to say?
> 
> 
> -- Greg
> 
> 
> Chiusano Joseph wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Which brings us back to what I believe is the single most important 
> > question for us to answer: Does one service constitute a 
> SOA? Or are 2 
> > or more services required?
> > 
> > If 2 or more services are required, then it seems to me 
> that in order 
> > to call something a *SOA* reference model, the notion of multiple 
> > services must be incorporated - as that is the minimal amount of 
> > information necessary to *effectively* represent/model the 
> "targeted 
> > entity" (which is SOA) for the intended audience.
> > 
> > If one service constitutes a SOA, this implies that a SOA may have 
> > more than one service. It then seems to me that one has a 
> choice for 
> > their
> > RM: include only a single service in the model, or include multiple 
> > services. The question then becomes which approach enables the most 
> > effective representation for the intended audience.
> > 
> > So as you see, I believe everything flows from this single most 
> > important question.
> > 
> > Joe
> > 
> > Joseph Chiusano
> > Booz Allen Hamilton
> > Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
> >   
> > 
>