• Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

Comments (5)

1 localhost commented Permalink

Attended DC event - most valuable thing I took away was the recommendation to "take down the scaffolding". But back in the office when I relayed the "hunting with Dick" comments, I was asked "was he really on the hunting trip?". Never occurred to me. Please don't disillusion me!

2 localhost commented Permalink

I have a hard time killing spiders.I've never been hunting, and surely have not gone hunting with Dick (nor would I even were he to politely ask me).

3 localhost commented Permalink

Why do you say that some of the existing system must be web-centric to make a SOA suitable?

4 localhost commented Permalink

As pointed out by you there are two ways to SOAised

 
1. Take the existing Silo system and publish their services. Bottom up.
 
2. Design a system and ask the existing Silo system to provide services that are required. Top down.
 
I tend to like the bottom up approach as the Silo system holds the business logic and data. As an expert of the system, they will publish services that will preserve the system integrity. Let the new systems be designed so that they can work around the constraints of the Silo system.
 
If we go Top down approach, then every Dick will need something new and will make the Silo system just a pleaser for everyone, a slave rather than master of business logic and data. System integrity could be at risk and changes in the Silo system will go for ever.

5 localhost commented Permalink

I totally aggree. We're currently producing hugh expenses with the bottom-up approach (and additionally the lack of architecture within our legacy apps). Wasn't our choice - business staff refused to support SOA.

Add a Comment Add a Comment