|
<snip>this relaxes technical and
business coupling, leading to market driven (CoI) composite apps, and
tech/bus (insert your favorite abused term here...)
'agility'.</snip>
Yes - this is indeed part of the idea -
however - I would venture that certain avid static technology adoption
has in fact merely re-inforced the status-quo from the older EDI-based
exchanges where the norm is highly brittle and tight
interchange coupling that both fails at the merest data varience / and
requires hands-on maintenance and change control to keep everything
aligned across a CoP.
Hardly the fulfilment of next generation
dynamic information exchange and easy adoption + plug-and-play for
Tier-3 participants and solution providers!
Clearly more worked needed in terms of
determining not only what contributes to loose coupling - but also what
emphatically does not - and the absence thereof too.
; -)
DW
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
[soa-forum] RE: loose coupling
From: g.thomas@xxxxxxx
Date: Thu,
August 17, 2006 3:35 pm
To: "Service-Oriented Architecture CoP"
<soa-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The SCA spec does a reasonable job of describing loose coupling
based on independence of service deployment (see osoa.org). When
services are composed (into b2b/g2g/a2a collaborations) across
disparate (in/out-sourced, org/geo boundary crossing) service hosts
(app-srv/containers), this relaxes technical and business coupling,
leading to market driven (CoI) composite apps, and tech/bus (insert
your favorite abused term here...) 'agility'. SCA by no means has a
monopoly on this idea, just wanted to point to something that does a
reasonable job of trying to distinguish tight/loose coupling in the
context of an emerging SOA standard.
-g
"Metz
Rebekah" <metz_rebekah@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: soa-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
08/17/2006 01:29 PM
|
Please respond
to
"Service-Oriented Architecture CoP"
<soa-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
|
To
| "Service-Oriented Architecture CoP"
<soa-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| RE: [soa-forum] Question/Issue for the
SOA CoP |
|
From:
soa-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:soa-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David RR
Webber (XML)
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:18
PM
To: Service-Oriented Architecture CoP
Subject:
RE: [soa-forum] Question/Issue for the SOA CoP
[->] David,
<snip> and bravo!
I've also seen the need to return to the critical topic
of "loose coupling". Everyone claims they are doing loosely
coupled implementations, but are they really?!?
What does loose coupling REALLY mean - both in terms of
transport layer integration, AND information exchange
integration?!
[->] I applaud your recognition that what the phrase
‘loose coupling’ intends to
convey is not just integration at a technology level
– it is at the business level! There are
certainly many aspects of integration and I believe that all of them
have an impact on ‘loosely
coupled.’ What is actually loosely coupled?
If two systems both speak http, does that mean that when those
systems are used as tools that they are ‘loosely
coupled?’; are the humans that rely on those tools
‘loosely coupled?’
The XML/edi Group first coined
the term 'loosely coupled' back in 1998 - but since then it has taken
on a marketing gloss - without folks really articulating what and how
their toolsets actually support it.
[->] In a recent conversation with a
colleague, we also spoke of
‘coarse-grained’ in this same
vein. When is something ‘fine-grained vs.
coarse-grained is largely dependent on perspective.
Providing
clear specifications and standards in support of loose coupling remains
just as tough now as back in 1998.
Fortunately folks have at least learned now what does NOT work
with XML and schema - and are now returning to the well to draw out
what insights they need to leverage and understand to resolve the
operational issues.
Hints: key
words - Role, Context, self-adapting, fault tolerant, agile, simple
XML....
[->]
I also spent several years in the field of grid computing research,
just as it started to migrate toward a web services based architecture.
I would venture that there are many lessons in terms of context,
adaptation, agility and tolerance that could be learned from the grid
community on these topics.
DW
[->] Rebekah
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re:
[soa-forum] Question/Issue for the SOA CoP
From: "ajit kapoor"
<ajitorsarah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, August 16, 2006 6:18
pm
To: "Service-Oriented Architecture CoP"
<soa-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Chris,
Thanks for sharing
your work. I must say I agree with you in so much as it addresses the
necessary technology conditions that must be met to have a SOA
paradigm, but the sufficiency has largely been ignored (may be based on
assumption that people and process based practices will follow).
I have been quite intrigued by the "SOA Buzz"
industry wide but am concerned by the lack of understanding of the
architecture (if viewed only from a technology viewpoint). The best
practices should be addressed fundamentally from the view point of
standard processes, people/organizational culture (a basic propensity
to hinder change)and then overlay the technical layer on it. Also even
on the technology front the standards are still in flux and the best
efforts to integrate higher layer of the SOA protocol stack must rely
on the WS Interoperability forum. Vendors are selling point solutions
for the higher layer protocols and we will end up creating EAI
equivalent of the SOA integration problem. Where will the values be in
terms of reusability, etc. I believe the DoD and Government in general
as part of the GIG/NC initiative must take the lead in coalescing
multiple standards on all the fronts of people, process, and technology
so as to start talking about best practices building blocks.
I look forward to other comments and potential
recommendations. The result of this exercise should be, in my opinion,
a roadmap from current SOA platform to the desired state with People,
process and technologies roadmap defined in an evolutionary and
standards way.
regards,
ajit kapoor
Lockheed Martin
EIS/CTO
(retiring October 1,
2006)
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Gunderson
To: 'Service-Oriented Architecture CoP'
Sent:
Wednesday, August 16, 2006 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: [soa-forum] Question/Issue for the SOA
CoP
Brand, I’m
working on a project sponsored by DISA Joint Interoperability Test
Command. A key component is the need to develop appropriate SOA
implementation and validation and verification guidance. The idea
is to provide a useful service to GIG software developers that
encourages re-use of best practices and code.
The attached is a work in progress.
So….1. We
have a mandate to do this work. 2. We have no
“not-invented-here†issues. 3. We
want to port as many industrial best practices as possible. 4.
We’re on a fast track.
We welcome any and all help from the SOA Forum.
The attached is very much a work in progress with no pride of
authorship.
Best,
Chris
Chris Gunderson
Research Associate Professor of Information Science
Naval Postgraduate School
Principal Investigator, W2COG and Netcentric
Certification Office Initiatives
(O)
703 262 5332
(C) 831 224 5182
From:
soa-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:soa-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Niemann.Brand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, August 16,
2006 3:08 PM
To: soa-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:
[soa-forum] Question/Issue for the SOA CoP
I have
been asked about the ownership/governance issue and whether any best
practices exist for SOA. We covered governance in the First SOA
Conference for E-Government, but I don't recall specifically ownership
being discussed. Any suggestions, references, etc. would be
appreciated.
Thanks, Brand
_________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/soa-forum/
Shared Files:
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/soa/
Community Portal:
http://colab.cim3.net/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AnnouncementofSOACoP
_________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/soa-forum/
Shared Files:
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/soa/
Community Portal:
http://colab.cim3.net/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AnnouncementofSOACoP _________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/soa-forum/
Shared Files:
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/soa/
Community Portal:
http://colab.cim3.net/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AnnouncementofSOACoP
_________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/soa-forum/
Shared Files:
http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/soa/
Community Portal:
http://colab.cim3.net/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AnnouncementofSOACoP
_________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/soa-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/soa/
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Community Wiki: http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AnnouncementofSOACoP (01)
|