vfrisina, I think you're on to something comparing SOA to OO. In OO there are simple but deep concepts to grok, followed by things to experiment with and practice before it works. I think SOA is the same sort of thing. Instead of the cells of the system being objects, they are services.
A lot of OO and SOA is marketing fluff. Marketing is good; business guys learn what we can do for them and pay us for our work. Fluff is annoying because you have to chop through it to get to something solid. SOA is currently snowed under fluff, just like OO in 1994.
I think its valiant to define some standards to help with SOA, so long as people realize that today's standards probably won't be the ones we use next year. They are handy for coordinating productions of big systems built by big teams, even if only to shorten debates. I share Dr. Waldo's fear that the standards will quash innovation, but so far innovation seems quite healthy. Older good things like JINI seem to rise to the top. I don't know of anything bad that's been lost yet. |
java.net RSS Feeds
