RE: [soa-rm] Definition(s) of "service"

["Sotudeh, Kooros \(US - McLean\)" <csotudeh@deloitte.com>]

Suggestion:  In order to address the various subtleties, we should seek
to define a service based on "what it is", "how it is used", and "what
characteristics it displays".  In addressing the three areas above, we
can define a service as:

"what it is" - a service is a set of tasks that provide one or more
functionalities (or capabilities)
"how it is used" - it is accessed via a prescribed interface defined by
the producer of the service
"what characteristics it displays" - provides value to potential
consumers based on its defined contract (i.e. interface, QoS, etc.)

So, given the above breakdown, I think it addresses the car or shoeshine
analogies in the sense that 1) a service is result-oriented, i.e. it's
not about simple behaviour, but rather the purpose of what those
behaviours achieve 2) it is not the boundary or the interface, but
rather it is accesed via the interface, and 3) while it can exist
without being invoked by a consumer, its ultimate value is driven by the
success of its usage.

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: soa-rm-return-2005-csotudeh=deloitte.com@lists.oasis-open.org
[mailto:soa-rm-return-2005-csotudeh=deloitte.com@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Schuldt, Ron L
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 12:32 PM
To: Frank McCabe; SOA-RM
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Definition(s) of "service"

Frank,

While I believe that the previously proposed definition is sufficient, I
offer the following as a compromise. Hopefully, the notion of
"capabilities" addresses your issue of needing to get things done.

"A service is a set of behaviors to provide capabilities accessible via
a prescribed interface."

Ron


-----Original Message-----
From: Frank McCabe [mailto:frank.mccabe@us.fujitsu.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:10 AM
To: SOA-RM
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Definition(s) of "service"


I hesitate to spoil this party ... but I'm going to :)

1. There is a distinction between action and result. (Just ask any  
roboticist) Behaviour sounds a child misbehaving with no discernible  
effect. Computer Scientists have a tendency to focus on the purely  
technical aspects of their work: bytes shuffling around at random  
within hopefully enormous memories.
2. Also, we have to bear in mind that nobody invests millions of $s  
(or even 100's of them) in systems that contemplate their navels or  
have no business payoff. I think that we have to directly address the  
reason that services are deployed.
3. One of the movitating best practice aspects of SOAs is that  
clarity and 'separation' between the providers of services and the  
consumers of services leads to more scalable and robust architectures.

All of the above is fuzzy language; but, at the same time,  "A  
service is a set of behaviors accessible via a prescribed interface."  
sounds a lot like bureauspeak.

I believe that there is strong consensus on the following  
characteristics:
a. The concept of service is 'at the boundary' between service  
providers and consumers.
b. The service is 'there' to get things done; but doesn't itself  
denote the engine that performs the tasks.
c. There is a reason for using a service.
d. There is a lot of extra metalogical information about services  
that make it possible for third parties to develop partners for  
services.

I, for one, would prefer a strongly anglo-saxon phrasing of the  
definition of service that speaks to these points.

Frank 


This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. [v.E.1]