Pete quotes Anne Thomas Manes as saying:
As Pete points out this definition has a dependency on the
definition of "service". Pete's definition is "a network available
collection of related operations".
Okay, I'll buy that, and I'll also buy a $0.50 contract on Pete's
"a resource is not a service". I'd say a resource is a service, albeit
a very limited one that can only operate on one piece of data. An RSS feed is a good example of a one-resource service. But a
collection of resources is definitely a service. In fact, "service" is what we call a collection of related resources.
A single resource can't have arbitrary operations, but you can
expose arbitrary operations by exposing combinations of
resources. It's not the same design as an RPC service, but only
intertia associates RPC with "service-oriented" in the first place,
and a service-oriented system could easily consume a mix of
resource-oriented and RPC-style services.
![[Comments]](/nb//themes/Default/comments.png "2 comments")
(2) Tue Nov 14 2006 00:31:
This one's pretty short; I just want to respond to Pete's
entry about the term "SOA". I have largely bought into Assaf's
assertion that defining resource-oriented services out of the SOA
cuts them away from a large source of largess and buzz for no real
reason. I don't really care about "SOA", but I do care about people spending
money in the right places, so I want to leave the rhetorical ground
open for those who can make that happen.
Service oriented architecture (SOA) is a software design discipline in
which application and infrastructure functionality are implemented as
shared, reusable services.
under a Creative Commons License.