Re: [soa-rm-ra] Disambiguating Action (Part I) - Take 2

[Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>]

Michael,

My problem with your proposed capability is it ties it to the service and the RM is clear that the capability exists apart from the service it accesses.

Ken

On May 28, 2008, at 6:43 AM, michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com wrote:

To the Point 1:

In SOA RM, a service is defined as a "set of technical and business elements that form a path between those with needs and those with capabilities." This sounds like those with needs are interested in capabilities.

If capabilities are resources, then aforementioned statement is ambiguous� a service consumer is interested in the results of using resources� RWE, not in the resources per se. Am I wrong?

I think that RM is more consistent and comprehensive about capabilities than, unfortunately, we are. Here is my proposal for the definition of Capability:

Capability: declared ability of the service in providing a real-world effect to a service consumer by utilizing underlying resource or set of resources.

Difference is that in the RM capability is the RWF, in my definition� it is an ability to provide RWE using resources.

Functionality� agreed

RWE� - agreed

Action� I do like Kens the message sender invokes the service's action. We do not define and consumer does not care what the service actions are but, in contrast with MOM, a service consumer KNOWS that a service executes its actions in respond to the invocation (in the cases of brokering intermediary a consumer might not know which service would be invoked but it is a different story)

- Michael

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ken Laskey

MITRE Corporation, M/S H305� � ��phone: 703-983-7934

7515 Colshire Drive�� � � � � � � � � � � ��fax:�� � ��703-983-1379

McLean VA 22102-7508

smime.p7s