Duane:
It is not the interaction that results in a real world effect.
It is the use of the capability that does.
Also I don't think its quite accurate to say that the link between
interaction and service is exchange. You interact with a service by
exchanging information.
The execution context includes *everything* needed to support
interaction.
It is not right to say that visibility = policy+service+description
(as implied by the nesting. We currently state that
visibility=awareness+willingness+reachability.
Frank
P.S. I gave a talk about the RM to OMG yesterday. Went down very
well. People like the simplicity.
P.P.S. Concept maps are very flexible. That is both an advantage and
a risk :)
Of course, what is not captured is how the RWE™ itself is modeled...
On Dec 7, 2005, at 10:13 AM, Duane Nickull wrote:
> See new revision.
>
> Answering your and Wes's comments, I have realized I made a gross
> inconsistent decision in the graph. If Service description points at
> Functionality, then Wes is right and it should also point at policy.
> For simplistic sake, I would like to recommend we remove the binary
> association between service description and functionality and state in
> accompanying text that if the service description describes aspects of
> the service, the functionality represented by the service, along with
> the policy MAY be described along with other aspects of a service.
>
> In keeping with the concept of managed transparency, it would be
> best to
> keep this as a MAY IMO.
>
> KISS!
>
> Duane
>
> *******************************
> Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT http://www.uncefact.org/
> Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee
> Personal Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
> *******************************
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Laskey [mailto:]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:00 AM
> To: Duane Nickull;
> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Diagram
>
> Duane,
>
> In general, I like the diagram but have a few suggested mods:
>
> 1. "Capability Metadata" (not included in current diagram) describes
> a Capability, Service Description just describes the
> Service. However, as seems appropriate to the service provider, the
> Service Description can point to and otherwise reference the
> Capability Metadata if that is useful in describing the Service.
>
> 2. More appropriate to say Service accesses Capability rather than
> represents.
>
> A version hacked in Powerpoint is attached.
>
> Ken
>
> At 12:24 PM 12/6/2005, Duane Nickull wrote:
>> I tried to spin the puzzle diagram into a pseudo layered stack.
>>
>> D
>>
>> *******************************
>> Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com
>> Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT http://www.uncefact.org/
>> Chair - OASIS SOA Reference Model Technical Committee
>> Personal Blog - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
>> *******************************
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> ---------
> / Ken
> Laskey
> \
> | MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 |
> | 7515 Colshire Drive fax:
> 703-983-1379 |
> \ McLean VA 22102-7508
> /
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> ----------
> <SOA-RM-Model-August2005.png>
