I am sorry for missing our meeting today - my work meeting went over the planned time.
I support Ken's edition (in red below) about orchestration.
As of "service-oriented business collaboration" (which is a buttery butter to me), let me notice that "those service-oriented processes" are nothing more than service orchestrations, i.e. the presented statement is about a choreography language that must be able to describe (define) an orchestration. Isn't this an 'abra-cadabra' ?
Also, business collaboration is naturally manual/human service centric form of relationshhips. In some cases, collaborating parties may offere their automated services as part of their business services. I am saying "in some cases" because according to the definition of business collaboration, participants are ready and may be obliged to modify their internal business services/process for the purposes of collaboration. This is not suitable for automated services. As a result, a business collaboration maps on SOA into automated service cooperation.
Thus, in magirity of cases, business collaborations is for human-centric business services where some automated services may cooperate.
Here is my proposal for the choreography statement:
<<In a service-oriented business collaboration, a choreography must be capable of addressing those service-oriented processes that cross organizational boundaries. In case of an upset of automation, the choreography should provide for contingencies including, as with orchestration, human intervention.>>
- Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Laskey
Sent: 05/23/12 07:37 PM
To: 'Peter F Brown', 'Rex Brooks',
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] issues 235 and 236 [was: [soa-rm-ra] Groups - SOA-RAF-Minutes-May 23-2012.doc uploaded]
One other item for consideration: I had an action to deal with issue #235. I’m not sure if we missed going over that or it wasn’t minuted. In either case, my suggested response is:
added paragraph to end of section 4.3.5.1:
Orchestration is typically considered in the context of automated processes; however, human actors may also take part. This may be particularly important in cases where the automation fails and human intervention becomes necessary.
In addition, in response to issue #236, I modified the last paragraph in section 4.3.5.2 to read:
In a service-oriented business collaboration, a choreography language must be capable of describing the coordination of those service-oriented processes that cross organizational boundaries. In case of an upset, the choreography should provide for contingencies including, as with orchestration, human intervention.
These issues are still open pending acceptance of the above or further revision.
Ken
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Kenneth Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Peter F Brown
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 2:27 PM
To: Rex Brooks;
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Groups - SOA-RAF-Minutes-May 23-2012.doc uploaded
Rex,
I made a few edits and will send this as an updated document – copy attached for into
Cheers,
Peter
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Rex Brooks
Sent: Wednesday, 23 May, 2012 11:05
To:
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Groups - SOA-RAF-Minutes-May 23-2012.doc uploaded
Submitter's message
Please review for accuracy.
-- Rex Brooks
Document Name: SOA-RAF-Minutes-May 23-2012.doc
No description provided.
Download Latest Revision
Public Download Link
Submitter: Rex Brooks
Group: SOA-RM Reference Architecture SC
Folder: Meeting Notes
Date submitted: 2012-05-23 11:05:03
