Duane,
This is exactly how I see things going, having sub committees formed to
work on reference architectures. One thing I *do* want to be careful
of, however, is commissioning any of these committees before the
reference model is at least a committee specification. I do not want
to split the TC's attention this early in the process, and I want to
make sure that the subcommittees are towing the SOA-RM "party
line"...which is impossible when the party platform is still in
incubation.
Thanks,
Matt
On 18-Apr-05, at 5:23 PM, Duane Nickull wrote:
> All:
>
> I have read through the last batch of email. There are a couple of
> things I would like to propose for comments. Please read this entire
> email before replying.
>
> 1. I will concede that many members of the public will likely have the
> same kinds of trouble interpreting a reference model vs. a reference
> architecture vs a specific architecture as seems to be pervasive on
> this list. If we have the problem in our context, it is likely to be
> present outside of this list.
>
> 2. We cannot redefine what a "reference model" is or what it includes.
> If we tried to change the industry definition of reference model to
> one that has concrete items in it or things that are not part of SOA
> (which is tricky since it is still undefined), it will not be a true
> reference model and hence not accepted by industry.
> 3. Service provider and service consumer are not part of a reference
> model. They are roles visible only in a runtime or infrastructure
> views of a specific architecture. To prove this point, please look
> once again at the OSI reference model. It is a communications stack
> RM yet does not contain notions of a message sender and message
> receiver.
> 4. We cannot mix abstract concepts and "things people can chew on"
> (implying concrete items) in our work. Such does run adverse to
> accepted architectural conventions.
>
> SOLUTION:
>
> One way forward is to probably create a sub committee to work on a
> reference architecture for SOA. A Reference Architecture could be
> developed in parallel to the reference model and is fair game to
> illustrate things like security, consumers, providers, agents etc. It
> is within our charter to do such.
>
> After reading through some older emails, I would assert that such a
> thing is probably essential along with some sort of white paper or
> user guide that explains the relationships between the RM, the RA and
> other architecture.
>
> Reference Model
> (is a guide for developing a)
> [ Reference Architecture || * Architecture ]
>
> There are several people on this list who also have stated specific
> needs for what they see in SOA. Perhaps this may be a good Sub
> Committee (SC) consideration also.
> Government Service Oriented Reference Architecture???
> etc.
>
> I can already see there are many of you who could lead such an effort
> as a sub committee.
> Comments?
>
> Duane
>
> --
> ***********
> Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. -
> http://www.adobe.com
> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/
> Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources -
> http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html
> ***********
>
