| The problem of metaservice as you've defined it is that you are assuming the underlying capability is only used to do something with another service. Now while that may be the only use that makes sense for a particular metaservice, in SOA we specifically do not make assumptions on who future users may be or the context in which they will find that service useful. Would we really get value out of arguing the conditions under which a service is a metaservice and when it is not?
Ken
On Feb 10, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote: -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 11:10 AM To: Ken Laskey; Chiusano Joseph Subject: Re: [soa-rm] What Is A "Metaservice"?
Why do we need a term for service metadata?
Exactly. That was my motivation for suggesting a different definition for "metaservice".
Joe
Joseph Chiusano Associate Booz Allen Hamilton
700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 O: 202-508-6514 C: 202-251-0731
Rex
At 9:55 AM -0500 2/10/06, Ken Laskey wrote: I typically cause physical damage to people who say metadata
is about data. (OK, not really.) That is a circular definition that
tells you nothing. In our context, metadata is a subset of
information related to an entity, including parts of the entity, that are needed for a particular purpose. That means metadata can also be descriptive information about a service. The early SOA-RM drafts (I
think 07 and before) had an appendix on metadata
As far as metaservice, the description of service supports a
hierarchy or combination of services, including services working with and on other services. To have metaservice as a useful concept, you would need a base level SERVICE and then things acting on it. The identification of SERVICE will be use dependent and the source of endless, fruitless arguments.
Ken
On Feb 10, 2006, at 8:34 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote:
This may potentially be pertinent for our Reference
Architecture work:
In a recent entry[1] in his blog called "Focus on
Repositories", David Linthicum mentions the term "metaservice". Quote (see end of [1]):
"Since data about data is called metadata, I call data
about services metaservices. A term we may be hearing more about in the
future, and what will exist in these repositories."
I differ with Dave on this, and see "metaservice" as being
something different. Here's my comment on his blog:
<Comment> On the following: "Since data about data is called metadata, I call data about services metaservices":
Since metadata is "data about data", I wonder if a
metaservice should really be considered a "service about services"? If so, what would that really mean? Perhaps it's a service that "sits above"
a number of other services and provides, well, services about (or for?) those services that, upon invocation, returns various details about those services, or perhaps performs services upon the
services themselves (such as aggregating them at design time).
Just thinking out loud here... </Comment>
Comments on my comment?
Joe
Joseph Chiusano Associate Booz Allen Hamilton
700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 O: 202-508-6514 C: 202-251-0731
--- Ken Laskey MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 McLean VA 22102-7508
-- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-849-2309
--- Ken Laskey MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 McLean VA 22102-7508
|