Interview: Jim Webber on "Guerilla SOA"
Watch the full interview (24 minutes).
Thanks very much for publishing this interview,
( Jan Vegt, 42, The Netherlands )
Links to references
Seems not that new
1. ebXML, for the message-oriented framework with Business Messages focus
2. WSCI, as a way to describe long-running conversations
Where are the differences between what you describve here and what I pointed out?
Thanks a lot
A different approach with difference strenghts and weaknesses
The danger of RPC style is that we use it to integrate systems that should be decoupled. The danger of messaging style is if we use it to distribute things that really should be colocated. Fowler's first law of distributed computing will always be relevant. Let's stop using shining new tools as an excuse to ignore it.
Guerilla SOA vs. Guerilla vs. SOA
However, a lightweight SOA implementation rapidly following business changes (sorry, changes of business opinions) is not SOA. SOA is Service-Oriented Architecture in business first of all. As an Architecture and as an orientation on business service it cannot be lightweight, i.e. lighter than it has to be. All candidates to business services (forget about business processes - they are just one of possible forms of implementation of business services) must be validate in business first, and only then may be released to IT for some implementation if needed.
If a business stakeholder wants something or changes his/her opinion about how something has to work, it is not enough to qualify such requirement for a new business service. The first qualifier in this case is adherence to Business (functional)Architecture, business objectives and plans. A fast production of integration interfaces - using messaging/MEST, WS, REST, ETL, IDL, etc. - is the last step in producing services while the first step is production of business functionality (a new one or a new composition of old ones).