[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Whither the No-Service-Consumer Motion?
Actually the feedback from Part 1 has convinced me to do a Part 3, which takes a bit of the pressure off for what has to be covered in Part 2, and it is a collaboration so I am only doing half of it, so, yeah, it actually does free up a bit of time from an otherwise somewhat slack week. It is only somewhat, but that still feels like a vacation to me. The big hurdle was just getting started back in on it. Tghe Holiday/Vacation thing gets contagious. However... Once I get to the point where the research starts revealing new stuff, it gets interesting again. Otherwise it is a mite dry. Ciao, Rex At 4:29 PM -0400 7/6/05, Chiusano Joseph wrote: ><Quote> >This being the one week in which I have a tiny bit of extra time, >while working on "Ontology Manageement for Federal Agencies Part 2 ></Quote> > >Working on that problem affords you extra time? :) > >Joe > >Joseph Chiusano >Booz Allen Hamilton >Visit us online@ <http://www.boozallen.com/>http://www.boozallen.com > > > >From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 7:46 AM >To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: [soa-rm] Whither the No-Service-Consumer Motion? > >Hi Folks, > >This being the one week in which I have a tiny bit of extra time, >while working on "Ontology Manageement for Federal Agencies Part 2," >and in light of the fact that this critical and unresolved issue was >not ready for our last TC meeting, AND because I have prepared >myself to to write a Minority Report in anticipation of losing the >ballot we have agreed to conduct, I can't help but wonder what >happened to Peter Brown's Motion to officially place the Service >Consumer out of the SO?, or is it SOA? RM. > >I would truly appreciate having the motion out for a ballot and a >clarification of whether the RM is SO or SOA. To say that those of >us, or at least one of those of us, who sincerely believe that >keeping the Service Consumer out of the Reference Model is like >tying one hand behind our backs, and after having collected a bit of >outside feedback, tepid though it is and constrained as it is by the >obvious headlong rush of the industry to embrace ANYTHING that can >create a marketing BUZZ, I would appreciate being able to finish up >my own engagement with this issue while I have a break and just >before all of Europe and most of North America takes a two month >siesta. Otherwise, you can expect me to proprose my own motion to >include the Service Consumer at some point in the future, so heads >up, please! > >Also, for those of us stateside, I would like to remind you that the >juggernaut called the Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference >Model is rolling downhill at an increasing pace, so if you want to >have a say in it, you should be aware that this effort also appears >to be set to move forward come hell or high water, or both, this >summer, but there is public feedback mechanism > >http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/drm-public > >Please do not mistake courtesy for silence in not pestering us all >with this on a continual basis nor should this courtesy be construed >as anything resembling consent. I see no sense in making a nuisance >out of this and I am reasonable able to read the handwriting on the >wall to use a well worn trope, and I respect everyone's time as much >as my own, but it is time to get this out of the way. > >Lastly, the proponents out there of the Enterprise Service Bus and >SOA Fabric both are continuing to whip their steeds into as much of >a lather as they can in order to own a rarified position in the >driver's seat of SOA. Neither concept works for me, but the >marketing hype continues with more than a healthy dollop froth which >is only to be expected, after all. > >However, I have noted a tendency in this TC to use the fabric >concept, and I don't think it is warranted, and in fact, is likely >to place us in a particular camp or school of thought. I don't think >we should be doing that. > >It seems to me that we should identify in the RM or in the RA (if >that is the course we choose for including a need for which a >service ought to be considered before developed rather than the >other way round), that there are various frameworks which be used in >SOA, including UDDI and ebXML Registry/Repository, and Extended >Metadata Registry (XMDR) for ISO 11179, in order to build >well-maintained and reliable registries-repositories of resources >through which Services and Service Consumers can identify, locate >and verify each other. We don't need nice, catchy phraseology from >one or another camp, vendor community or school of thought. > >As someone noted, we are already saddled by a marketing concept >phrase in our very existence as the "Service-Oriented Architecture" >Reference Model. Can we not compound this situation with a >back-handed endorsement of one or another largely vendor-centric >label for a non-vendor-centric framework? May we also not restrict >ourselves to UDDI or ebXML or ISO 11179? > >Ciao, >Rex > > >-- >Rex Brooks >President, CEO >Starbourne Communications Design >GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >Berkeley, CA 94702 >Tel: 510-849-2309 -- 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]