Thursday, December 23, 2010 8:49 PM, Anders Tell wrote:
"Reading the document one can really ask, who, except for an IT
professionals, can read, understand and practice it? (Top) management?
lawyers? Business process owners?"
Indeed. More than two years ago the group's director appeared on the forum
asking for public comments. Now it appears it was only predending to push
the model of service as “a logical representation of a repeatable activity
that has a specified outcome"... To briefly repeat what was suggested:
"A service is a complex business process, involving a service provider
(agency) with its skill, experience, ingenuity, or expertise and service
customer delivered intangible goods: new knowledge, learning, information,
advice, experience, plan of actions, defence, safety, care, and other life
necessities (food, shelter, utilities)"...
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws/2008Jul/0001.html
Azamat Abdoullaev (01)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anders Tell" <opensource@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fwd: [New post] The Newest from SOA: TheSOA
Ontology Technical Standard (02)
>I haven't studied the document carefully, so I may be off here and there.
>
> It seems to me as if this document is Yet Another IT- SOA vocabulary, made
> by and for IT professionals including IT oriented Architects.
>
> While such vocabularies of Interface oriented paradigms is useful for
> engineers and IT professional it miss key concepts of other professions.
> One can seriously question the approach fit-for-purpuse as Business-IT
> aligner.
>
> Im currently involved in a major industry project where SOA is supposed to
> be a core enabler. Unfortunately its hasn't been the great unifier, but
> quit the opposite. As a practitioner it consumes a lot a of energy, but
> as researcher Im preparing two case study since the project offers a great
> deal to study. Im personally interested in large scale Governance.
>
> Reading the document one can really ask, who, except for an IT
> professionals, can read, understand and practice it? (Top) management?
> lawyers? Business process owners?
>
> Is the definition
> “A service is a logical representation of a repeatable activity that
> has a specified outcome. It is self-contained and is a „black box‟ to its
> consumers.”
> the way other professions (above professions, + legislators) think about
> Services?
> An a black-box? In how many cases does a Consumer know absolutely nothing
> about the Providers activities or outcome?
>
> One of the problems with IT-SOA is that when the style is practiced there
> may be a tendency to treat everything (every information exchange) as
> Services. Then Service == InformationExchange. But isn't a Service, from a
> common sense point of view, related to someone that is providing a benefit
> to some? In this case not all exchanges are Services.
>
> And what happened to Service Remunerations? For many profession this is a
> first class concerns, relating to the essence of a Service.
>
> Another problem I've seen/is seeing is that IT Service professionals
> sometime sees themselves as Service designers while reducing Operational
> experts to providing requirements for service design activities. Hm, who
> is usually better at sourcing, IT- or Operational professionals? More than
> one profession discuss Services, obviously in different senses.
>
> A positive note: its good to see Events in a Service ontology. Occurrences
> are quite useful when discussing, describing Services, across professions.
> An proper process ontology such as PSL could also be a nice addition.
>
> Although I seriously wonder about the soundness of reasoning in section
> "4.3.1 Service Consumers and Service Providers ".
>
> If a SOA ontology is considered as a candidate for a ontological killer
> application then IMO then business and legal concerns must be explicitly
> added otherwise the name should include a prefix IT-SOA or System-SOA or
> ...
>
> holiday wishes
> /anders w tell
>
> On Dec 20, 2010, at 9:20 PM, Research wrote:
>
>> That's a pretty sweeping statement, Todd
>> Care to share why it is "rubbish"? And if there are valuable lessons to
>> be learned, I'd be pleased to learn them
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Peter F Brown
>> Independent Consultant
>>
>> Transforming our Relationships with Information Technologies
>> www.peterfbrown.com
>> @pensivepeter
>> P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA
>> Tel: +1.310.694.2278
>>
>>
>>
>> | -----Original Message-----
>> | From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
>> | bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Todd J Schneider
>> | Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2010 00:53
>> | To: [ontolog-forum]
>> | Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Fwd: [New post] The Newest from SOA: The
>> SOA
>> | Ontology Technical Standard
>> |
>> | To all concerned or interested the SOA ontology put forth by the Open
>> Group is
>> | rubbish for many reasons. I provided several pages of comments and
>> | justifications to an earlier draft and almost all of my comments were
>> not
>> | accepted.
>> |
>> | However, there is some value in this work. It can be used as an example
>> of
>> | errors that are commonly made.
>> |
>> | Finally, I'd like to commend Chris Harding in his efforts to reconcile
>> very
>> | divergent views and opinions.
>> |
>> | Todd
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | From:
>> | Ed Dodds <dodds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> | To:
>> | ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> | Date:
>> | 12/14/2010 06:46 PM
>> | Subject:
>> | [ontolog-forum] Fwd: [New post] The Newest from SOA: The SOA
>> Ontology
>> | Technical Standard
>> | Sent by:
>> | ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | FYI
>> |
>> | Ed Dodds
>> | Collaboration Strategist
>> | Conmergence.com
>> | dodds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> | (615) 657-9359
>> | ed_dodds_skype
>> | ed.dodds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> |
>> |
>> | ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> | From: clifford thompson <cliff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> | Date: Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:03 AM
>> | Subject: Fwd: [New post] The Newest from SOA: The SOA Ontology
>> Technical
>> | Standard
>> | To: Jim buckner <" James.Buckner"@state.ma.us>,
>> kevin.x.geminiuc@xxxxxx,
>> | Services Oriented Architecture <soa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steve Connolly <
>> | stconnoll@xxxxxxx>, "phil.barr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <
>> | phil.barr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jobst Landgrebe <
>> | jobstlandgrebe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> |
>> |
>> | Hi,
>> |
>> | FYI
>> |
>> | Cliff
>> | Best Regards,
>> |
>> | Clifford Thompson
>> | CTO
>> | OntoSolutions LLC
>> | 704.257.4422
>> | cliff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> | http://ontosolutions.com
>> | http://semanticarch.com/wordpress
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | -------- Original Message --------
>> | Subject:
>> | [New post] The Newest from SOA: The SOA Ontology Technical Standard
>> | Date:
>> | Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:42:42 +0000
>> | From:
>> | Open Group Blog <no-reply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> | To:
>> | cliff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | The Newest from SOA: The SOA Ontology Technical Standard
>> | The Open Group Blog | December 8, 2010 at 5:42 am | Tags: architect,
>> | communication, enterprise, IT, Open Group, organizations, OWL, SOA, SOA
>> | Ontology, SOA standards, SOA Work Group | Categories: Cloud/SOA | URL:
>> | http://wp.me/p1cB5i-1L
>> | By Heather Kreger
>> | Open Group just announced the availability of the SOA Ontology
>> Technical
>> | Standard.
>> | Ontology?? Sounds very ‘semantic Web,’ doesn’t it? Just smacks of
>> | reasoning engines. What on earth do architects using SOA want with
>> | reasoning engines?
>> | Actually, Ontologies are misunderstood — an Ontology is simply the
>> | definition of a set of concepts and the relationships between them for
>> a
>> | particular domain — in this case, the domain is SOA.
>> | They don’t HAVE to be used for reasoning… or semantic Web. And they are
>> | more than a simple glossary which defines terms, because they also
>> define
>> | relationships between them — something important for SOA, we thought.
>> It’s
>> | also important to note that they are more formal than Reference Models,
>> | usually by providing representations in OWL (just in case you want to
>> use
>> | popular tools for Ontology and reasoners).
>> | What would an architect do with THIS ontology?
>> |
>> | It can be used simply to read and understand the key concepts of SOA,
>> and
>> | more importantly, a set of definitions and UNDERSTANDING of key
>> concepts
>> | that you can agree to use with others in your company and between
>> | organizations. Making sure you are ‘speaking the same language’ is
>> | essential for any architect to be able to communicate effectively with
>> IT,
>> | business, and marketing professionals within the enterprise as well as
>> | with vendors and suppliers outside the enterprise. This common language
>> | can help ensure that you can ask the right questions and interpret the
>> | answers you get unambiguously.
>> | It can be used as a basis for the models for the SOA solution as well.
>> In
>> | fact, this is happening in the SOA repository standard under
>> development
>> | in OASIS, S-RAMP, where they have used the SOA Ontology as the
>> | foundational business model for registry/repository integration.
>> | The Ontology can also be augmented with additional related
>> domain-specific
>> | ontologies; for example, on Governance or Business Process Management…
>> or
>> | even in a vertical industry like retail where ARTS is developing
>> service
>> | models. In fact, we, the SOA Ontology project, tried to define the
>> | minimum, absolutely core concepts needed for SOA and allow other domain
>> | experts to define additional details for Policy, Process, Service
>> | Contract, etc.
>> | This Ontology was developed to be consistent with existing and
>> developing
>> | SOA standards including OMG’s SOA/ML and BPMN and those in the Open
>> Group
>> | SOA Workgroup: SOA Governance Framework, OSIMM, and the SOA Reference
>> | Architecture. It seems it would have been good to have developed this
>> | standard before now, but the good news is that it is grounded in
>> extensive
>> | real-world experience developing, deploying and communicating about SOA
>> | solutions over the past five years. The Ontology reflects the lessons
>> | learned about what terms NOT to use to avoid confusion, and how to best
>> | distinguish among some common and often overused concepts like service
>> | composition, process, service contracts, and policy and their roles in
>> | SOA.
>> | Have a look at the new SOA Ontology and see if it can help you in your
>> | communications for SOA. It’s available to you free at this link:
>> | http://www.opengroup.org/bookstore/catalog/c104.htm
>> | Additional Links:
>> | SOA Work Group: http://www.opengroup.org/soa, publishes the SOA
>> Ontology,
>> | SOA Governance Framework, OSIMM (Service Integration Maturity Model),
>> and
>> | SOA Reference Architecture
>> | SOA Ontology project:
>> | http://www.opengroup.org/soa/projects/ont.htm#_Ontologies_for_SOA
>> | SOA Repository Artifact Model and Protocol (S-RAMP), http://s-ramp.org,
>> | http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=s-ramp
>> | OMG, http://www.omg.org, publishes the SOA/ML and BPMN standards work
>> | Heather Kreger is IBM’s lead architect for Smarter Planet, Policy, and
>> SOA
>> | Standards in the IBM Software Group, with 15 years of standards
>> | experience. She has led the development of standards for Cloud, SOA,
>> Web
>> | services, Management and Java in numerous standards organizations,
>> | including W3C, OASIS, DMTF, and Open Group. Heather is currently
>> co-chair
>> | for the Open Group’s SOA Work Group and liaison for the Open Group SOA
>> and
>> | Cloud Work Groups to ISO/IEC JTC1 SC7 SOA SG and INCITS DAPS38 (US TAG
>> to
>> | ISO/IEC JTC 1 SC38). Heather is also the author of numerous articles
>> and
>> | specifications, as well as the book Java and JMX, Building Manageable
>> | Systems, and most recently was co-editor of Navigating the SOA Open
>> | Standards Landscape Around Architecture.
>> | Add a comment to this post
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
>> | Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Publish text, photos, music, and
>> | videos by email using our Post by Email feature.
>> | Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
>> | http://subscribe.wordpress.com
>> | ************************************************
>> | To access the Archives of this or other lists or change your list
>> settings
>> | and information, go to: http://www.hl7.org/listservice
>> |
>> | _________________________________________________________________
>> | Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> | Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> | Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> | Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> | Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> | To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> | To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | _________________________________________________________________
>> | Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> | Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> | Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> | Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> | Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> | To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> | To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> |
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (03)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (04)
|