[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] Proposal: Reorganization of SOA-RM Draft for Better
How about words such as “The specifics of a business process do not change the basic SOA concepts as described in the RM. However, the specific architecture that one designs and implements will reflect <some> business process. Within this context, the architecture should build upon specific service instances which correspond to the real world effects that the business process hopes to realize.”
I thought that the W3C recognized that IT service (in particular web service) interactions always occur via a virtual agent on both sides of the interaction? Here we’re starting to get into the notion that there are several ‘levels’ of critical entities within a service interaction that all remain congruent to one another within the course of a service interaction.
I think we need to add some words to the RM to capture
this discussion. We cover part of this in the beginning of Section 3.2.1
but need to be more specific that:
DN: given that we have scoped the RM for SOA to software architecture and it is abstract, is this correct and relevant? How can a human interface with a SOAP node? Since a human actor that invokes a service by using a SOAP client is invisible to the service tier, it is probably not correct or relevant as worded. I think I know what you are trying to say though.
DN: save this thought for RA.
DN: or an unbounded array of other options.