| I like the idea of the ontology capturing fundamental variations. This could be targeted as variations in fundamental attributes rather than using someone’s aggregate term, like microservices, and trying to come up with a characterization a large community would back.
Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Kenneth Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S F510 phone: 703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508
I am afraid, the industry does not want any help becuase it makes money of this “reinventing the wheel” and this is not for the firat time. I would be happy if they just stop refer to and compare with SOA. Very informative article! I am wondering how we can help the industry reach this level of specificity in understanding the relationship between SOA and the various implementation “styles”. REST, ServiceComputing, Microservices and more are variations of SOA which are always susceptible to an interpretation which separates the variation from the main body of SOA work, resulting in “reinventing the wheel”. To help the industry avoid this, perhaps we should include in our SOA ontology a subclass of SOA tentatively named Style or Variation, which is then specialized for each variation capturing what makes the variation unique. Perhaps this would help eliminate some confusion currently found in discussions of variations. William here is my short overview on how Microservices "compliant" with Principles of Service Orientation
|