RE: arch diagrams from the f2f

Perhaps we just need to clarify the meaning of the diagram. This diagram
simply shows the process by which an application finds and connects to
another application. It doesn't (or shouldn't) attempt to describe the
entire WSA architecture. It doesn't attempt to describe MEPs or multiple
interactions. These concepts should be conveyed in a different set of
diagrams

Here's how I describe this stuff in my book. (Notice that my diagram looks
more like Heather's original diagram, showing the roles, not just the
artifacts. Also note that my diagram is very client/server centric -- which
we probably want to change.):

The service-oriented architecture (SOA) describes a set of well-established
patterns that help a client application connect to a service. These patterns
represent mechanisms used to describe a service, to advertise and discover a
service, and to communicate with a service. Most communication middleware
systems, such as RPC, CORBA, DCOM, and RMI, rely on these SOA patterns.

Figure 3-2 [see attached] depicts the conceptual roles, artifacts, and
operations of the SOA. The three basic roles in the SOA are the service
provider, the service consumer, and the service broker. The service provider
supplies the service, the service consumer uses the service, and the service
broker facilities the advertising and discovery process. The three basic
artifacts in the SOA are the client, the service, and the service contract.
The client is the code that the service consumer uses to access the service;
the service is the code that supplies the service; and the service contract
describes the API that the client uses to access the service. The three
basic operations in the SOA are register, find, and bind. When a service
provider makes a service available, it describes the service by publishing a
service contract. The service provider then registers the service with a
service broker. A service consumer queries the service broker to find a
compatible service. The service broker gives the service consumer directions
on how to find the service and its service contract. The service consumer
uses the contract to bind the client to the service, at which point the
client and service may communicate.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Heather Kreger
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 5:37 PM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org; michael.mahan@nokia.com
> Subject: RE: arch diagrams from the f2f
>
>
>
>
>
>
> How about we do the simple triangle first that 'seems' client server.  I
> have sent words for the triangle to chris the editor to render in
> acceptable xml.
>
> The only problem with the triange with the peer to peer is that
> it makes it
> look like the pure requester is part of the scenario. I'd rather create a
> new triangle that we present separately with appropriate words.
>
> So, first simple 'requester/provider' triangle (btw, we didn't call them
> client and server on purpose for exactly this reason)
> Then we do a peer to peer
> And then Rogers variation:
> See attached:
>
> (See attached file: triangle.variations.ppt)
>
> ideas?
>
> Heather Kreger
> Web Services Lead Architect
> STSM, SWG Emerging Technology
> kreger@us.ibm.com
> 919-543-3211 (t/l 441)  cell:919-496-9572
>
>
> michael.mahan@nokia.com@w3.org on 09/23/2002 03:28:58 PM
>
> Sent by:    www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
>
>
> To:    <jones@research.att.com>, <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>, Heather
>        Kreger/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
> cc:    <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
> Subject:    RE: arch diagrams from the f2f
>
>
>
> Here is a diagram which better demonstrates p2p graphically.
>
> BR, Mike
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: ext jones@research.att.com [mailto:jones@research.att.com]
> >Sent: September 23, 2002 01:57 PM
> >To: RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com; jones@research.att.com;
> >kreger@us.ibm.com
> >Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> >Subject: RE: arch diagrams from the f2f
> >
> >
> >
> >I think the compromise would be to base most of the initial discussion
> >around the simple, unadorned triangle, laying out the range of
> >possibilities
> >in the text.  The elaborated diagrams should either reflect a union of
> >the abstractions and/or instantiations in the space or should reflect
> >a particular architectural style.  I would be comfortable with
> >the former
> >if it doesn't make things too confusing, but would gladly accept the
> >latter.
> >
> >--mark
> >
> >Mark A. Jones
> >AT&T Labs
> >Shannon Laboratory
> >Room 2A-02
> >180 Park Ave.
> >Florham Park, NJ  07932-0971
> >
> >email: jones@research.att.com
> >phone: (973) 360-8326
> >  fax: (973) 236-6453
> >
> >     From RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com Mon Sep 23 13:45 EDT 2002
> >     Delivered-To: jones@research.att.com
> >     X-Authentication-Warning: mail-pink.research.att.com:
> >postfixfilter set sender to RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com using -f
> >     X-Server-Uuid: EE520CAE-7FCA-4D2A-A2DC-297BA4A725CC
> >     From: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)"
> ><RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
> >     To: "'Mark Jones'" <jones@research.att.com>,
> >             "Heather Kreger" <kreger@us.ibm.com>
> >     Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> >     Subject: RE: arch diagrams from the f2f
> >     Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 10:44:36 -0700
> >     MIME-Version: 1.0
> >     X-WSS-ID: 11918CF6275166-01-01
> >     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >     X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests= version=2.20
> >
> >     I am still concerned that these diagrams seem visually
> >to restrict web
> >     services to one messaging pattern.  No matter what the
> >words might say in
> >     the text, I think that having pictures that leave this
> >impression would not
> >     be good.
> >
> >     -----Original Message-----
> >     From: Mark Jones [mailto:jones@research.att.com]
> >     Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 1:50 PM
> >     To: Heather Kreger
> >     Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> >     Subject: Re: arch diagrams from the f2f
> >
> >
> >     Heather,
> >
> >     I  added 3 slides at the end of the set that you sent
> >out.  I rearranged
> >     and simplified the boxes and labels a bit.  I also
> >began to append
> >     concrete technology labels on some of the boxes.  (I
> >just made a cursory
> >     pass at this to see what it would look like.  Feel free
> >to further flesh
> >     it out.)  At least while we are deciding on the correct
> >set of boxes and
> >     labels, I think it helps to identify them.
> >
> >     Mark Jones
> >     AT&T
> >
> >
> >     Heather Kreger wrote:
> >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >Hi folks, Here are the architecture diagrams I drafted
> >up during our
> >     >meeting today. I have some words for some of this
> >stuff that I will
> >     >align and send to the group as soon as
> >     >humanly possible.
> >     >
> >     >(See attached file: w3cStack.ppt)
> >     >
> >     >I have permission from IBM to submit both this stack
> >and the origional
> >     >triangle to the W3C for inclusion into the architecture and
> >     >modification by the working group.
> >     >
> >     >Heather Kreger
> >     >Web Services Lead Architect
> >     >STSM, SWG Emerging Technology
> >     >kreger@us.ibm.com
> >     >919-543-3211 (t/l 441)  cell:919-496-9572
> >     >
> >
> >
> >
>  >
>
>