[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] RM at Open Group...
Sounds about right, the element that stood out was around the definition of SOA in the glossary, if that gets changed to plain architecture it changes the context.
I’d actually argue that the RM does a very good job on purely technical services, even helps put into context when capabilities become services (e.g. some of the governance applications are really beginning to create services rather than policies as they are having real-world effects).
Good feedback on the BAH presentation from all parties though, is there a deliverable in the group on an overview (maybe as part of the formal announcements to come?).
From:
Metz Rebekah [mailto:metz_rebekah@bah.com]
It’s interesting to hear this comment this morning. Yesterday afternoon, one of my colleagues mentioned some discussions he had at a recent Gartner Group event. The feedback he provided was that the SOA-RM did a good job at describe business services, but didn’t acknowledge that things at a purely technical level (e.g. a storage service) can also be SOA without tying directly back to the business.
My reaction to that comment is to say that even a ‘purely technical’ service ties back to the capabilities. Perhaps they might tie in through the IT supply chain rather than a 1:1 correspondence to a business need. Nevertheless, I would argue why someone would offer a service if they don’t anticipate that they will provide that service to someone else. That mission objective may be a small part of the over mission objective for an enterprise – but it certainly should be traceable.
That said, if we’re receiving comments from both perspective – we’ve probably struck decent middle ground. Perhaps a primer on the RM might express these perspectives and how the RM supports both of them?
Rebekah
Rebekah Metz Associate Booz Allen Hamilton Voice: (703) 377-1471 Fax: (703) 902-3457
From:
Jones, Steve G [mailto:steve.g.jones@capgemini.com]
Capgemini are also fairly heavily involved in Open Group (running the BP group for instance) and at the SOA event the RM has come up in discussion…. Some feedback from the folks there
“We are looking at the OASIS SOA reference model in the SOA forum in Open Group - and having had a quick look at the document (scan at best, not complete) it looks like it actually can define SOA at a business level (Business Services) but the document has some references/qualifications in definitions that tie it to technology, application, etc.
This seems like a missed opportunity to define SOA as about business services.”
I actually think the document applies equally well in both technical and business domains but it might be something to tighten in the wording to help ensure that message comes across.
Steve
___________________________________________________________ Steve Jones | Capgemini CTO, Application Development Transformation T +44 870 906 7026| 700 7026| www.capgemini.com m: steve.g.jones@capgemini.com txt: +44 (0) 7891157026 Join the Collaborative Experience ___________________________________________________________
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]