More from Services-based enterprise integration patterns made easy

A third article from Dr. Waseem Roshen, in the series titled: Services-based enterprise integration patterns made easy, appeared today on dW SOA and Web services zone. Here is the abstract:

Part 1 and Part 2 of this series covered the basic concepts necessary to develop services-based integration patterns. This article, the third in the series, and the upcoming Part 4 further develop these ideas so the services-based integration patterns become full-blown services-based patterns. This article in particular deals with the components that are together commonly referred to as Web services, which were originally designed for services that can be accessed over the Internet. You'll also see that many of the Web services components can be used with services that don't use the Internet and that only require a network connection.

Create collaborative and dynamic method content using Web 2.0

developerWorks, SOA and Web services zone has just published the first in a series of papers that looks at addressing some of the ideas around context to content to enable asset consumability that I have been talking about on this blog, This paper titled: Create collaborative and dynamic method content using Web 2.0, talks about how to leverage Web 2.0 technologies to extend software development process content, which is typically published static as HTML. This article describes how you can develop the ability to collaboratively edit method content and have access to the latest dynamic content within a method context.

For this paper, and indeed many other papers, we have been fortune enough to work with developerWorks own, Patrick Flanders, and Ashleigh Brothers who do such a professional job in terms of reviewing, editing and laying out the content.

Among the school children

A couple of weeks ago I was giving a talk on enabling (pattern) asset consumability at an IBM hosted best practices conference down in Palisades, New York. The talk was scheduled to be at the end of the day so I knew my audience brains would be fried and overload by technical content by this time. Also, the title of my talk enabling (pattern) asset consumability would make the best of us yawn. So I decided on a different tack here, I am still not sure how successful it was, since only a handful of poor souls made it to my talk, but here it is anyway.

Recently I have read two excellent book on speech giving. The first is Give Your Speech, Change the World and the second on is Make to Stick. Now where there first book is excellent in detailing how to actually give presentation, the second book excels in detailing how to make your messages, in those presentations, stick to your audience. So for my talk I decided I would shake things up and open with a poem in a effort to exercise the right side of my their brains. The poem titled "Among the school children" from one my favorite poets W. B Yeats. Now this poem is long over 8 stanzas, so I just focused on one of the stanzas, here it is:

Plato thought nature but a spume that plays
Upon a ghostly paradigm of things;
Solider Aristotle played the taws
Upon the bottom of a king of kings;
World-famous golden-thighed Pythagoras
Fingered upon a fiddle-stick or strings
What a star sang and careless Muses heard:
Old clothes upon old sticks to scare a bird.

Here Yeats is examining the philosophies of some of the worlds famous philosophers from Plato to Pythagoras, yet with all their knowledge and insights, they all still withered and died away. In his later poetry, Yeats uses this recurring theme of a scarecrow to symbolize his own mortality. Here from the same poem:

Better to smile on all that smile, and show
There is a comfortable kind of old scarecrow.

As I said I am not sure how successful this technique was, my audience of five just was enough to swing it either way, but I would certainly be interested to know of other unconventional speech giving techniques that you have used in the past that have worked?

We will be publishing a paper on this talk soon and will post the link as soon as it becomes available.

A common message

Last month I did some service modeling work for a well known insurance company in the US. After five years of helping customers with SOA this particular company was very mature in terms of their cultural alignment between their business and IT stakeholders and was also adopting some of the best practices and patterns around SOA enablement.

A little background, this company is typical of so many other Fortune 500 companies in that the business struggles with it silo-ed nature, that has been built up over decades. Two simple silos within this organization are the personal and commercial insurances lines, both offering insurance products to different customer bases.

SOA is all about aligning the business with the IT and for this to happen they have to all speak a common language. To help understand this better lets take a simple analogy of the worlds favorite organization the United Nations. Now I am not privy to the internal working of the UN but I do know that it employs a lot of interpreters to interpret from one language to another. Take the example of an interpreter working for the French ambassador. This interpreter will need to be able to interpret from French to Chinese, from French to English, etc or to whatever the native language of the person the ambassador is talking with. This is clearly a very stressful job for the interpreter. Now lets pretend that I have been put in charge of the UN and have decreed that from now on the common international language will be Irish (this would be a complete disaster by the way, as Irish is notoriously a very difficult language with needlessly complicated grammar and syntax, I know this because I spent 14 painful years in school learning it). Now all the interpreters need to know is how to convert from their host language to Irish and back again.

Scaling this up to the enterprise, let us examine three best practices around a enterprise common message model:

1. The first best practice is simply to have one. The business and the IT need to agree upon an enterprise message format, or lingua franca across the organization. Thus what was traditionally a silo-ed organization in terms of personal and commercial insurance (each has a difference via of what a customer/party is) could now start to share service based on a common understanding about what what was a claim, a policy or indeed a customer/party. This really is not news to anyone starting to mature in the SOA space, however, the next best practice is a bit trickier.
2. The second best practice is not to build this enterprise common message model yourself. This can not be overstated. Building a enterprise strength common message model in a big job. To get a sense as to how big, consider IBM Insurance Application Architecture or IAA models. Now I am not here to plug these models, but they have been built up over ten years worth of experience, of practitioners, in the insurance industry. As a result these models are highly normalized and contain some of the best patterns and lessons learned and are what I would consider a mature enterprise model. There are many other enterprise strength message models out there such as ACORD, SID (telco), STAR (automotive) . One also needs to differentiate between industry standard models and priority models and here again I want to outline a best practices in terms of their usage. Industry standard model such as ACORD have been debated and agreed upon by concerned parties within an industry vertical, these models are there typically to level the playing field and provide a good, typically flat, model structure to enable B2B exchanges between companies in that particular business vertical. Priority models on the other hand such as IAA and IBM Information FrameWork Service Models (IFW), are highly normalized models, and are there to provide a company with core differentiation within the marketplace. The best practices then become to use a priority model internally within the organization, to define the internal services and as a lingua franca for the messaging infrastructure and then to use one or more industry standard models to define services that are exposed external to the organization and typically involved in B2B exchanges and delegate to the message infrastructure to convert between them.
3. Finally the enterprise message model must be managed and governed. New versions of these message model are being released all the time as new markets and opportunities arise and your company needs a coherent and consistent way of managing this change. Let us go back to our UN example and imaging that the Irish language was continuously changing (it is not, the Irish language in a considered a dead language), think of the nightmare for the interpreters having to continuously learn a new version of the common language.

For those you foolish enough to want to learn Irish, to champion the cause of having the UN adopt it as a common international language, if refer you to Des Bishop web site

Slán go fóill...

SOA information as a service pattern specifications

Guenter Sauter et al have three excellent SOA Information as a service pattern specification papers on data federation, data consolidation, and data cleansing. You can find these three papers on developerWorks:

• Data federation pattern: The data federation pattern virtualizes data from multiple disparate information sources. The pattern creates an integrated view into distributed information without creating data redundancy while federating both structured and unstructured information. This article describes the federation of structured information (data) with a focus on the SOA context. This pattern specification helps data and application architects make informed decisions on data architecture and document decision guidelines.
  


• Data consolidation pattern: The data consolidation pattern specification helps data and application architects make informed architectural decisions and improve decision guidelines. In this article you will see how you can apply the pattern in the SOA context. The primary business driver for the data consolidation pattern, also referred to as the data population pattern, is to gather and reconcile data from multiple data sources before this information is needed. To do so, it extracts data from one or more sources, transforms that data into the desired target format, and loads it into some persistent data target. The prepopulation of a persistent target is a key differentiator between this pattern and the data federation pattern.
  


• Data cleansing pattern: The data cleansing pattern specifies rules for data standardization, matching, and survivorship that enforce consistency and quality on the data it is applied against. The data cleansing pattern validates the data (whether persistent or transient) against the cleansing rules and then applies changes to enforce consistency and quality. In this article, you learn to apply the data cleansing pattern within a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) context. This pattern specification helps you, as a data or application architect, to make informed architectural decisions and to improve decision guidelines.
  

Services-based enterprise integration patterns made easy

A new article from Dr. Waseem Roshen, in the series titled: Services-based enterprise integration patterns made easy, appeared today on dW SOA and Web services zone. Here is the abstract:

This series of articles explains services-based enterprise integration patterns in an easy-to-understand, step-by-step way. In this installment, Part 1 of the series, you learn about the two earliest integration patterns—data sharing only and remote procedure call (RPC)—which help introduce the concepts of service provider and service consumer, platform independence, and connectivity. Exploring RPC helps you get familiar with the basic steps necessary for two applications to share functionality. This article also includes a general description of the concepts of loose coupling, code reuse, and layering and componentization. Part 2 of the series will continue the discussion of the early patterns, while Parts 3 and 4 cover the Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)-based integration patterns, including examples.

The asset graveyard

One of my favorite movies of all time is Sergio Leone spaghetti western classic: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly. Part of the appeal of this movie is the simplicity of the plot; at its heart it is, a treasure hunt, with the three main characters, the good, the bad and the ugly hunting for confederate gold. Between them they know the location of the treasure, buried in a grave in a graveyard, yet only their combined knowledge will lead them to the prize. Towards the end of the film the Ugly a character called Tuco, played by Eli Wallach, comes upon the graveyard, called Sad Hill, and here in one of cinema truly great moment, backed by a unforgettable score, he begins his frantic and haphazard search for the grave of Arch Stanton.

What is impressive about this scene is the sheer scale and size of the graveyard itself, a conservative estimate would put it at over 2000 graves, arranged in a circular fashion. Tuco starts from the center of Sad Hill, where the graves are oldest, and works his way outward initially in concentric circles but soon his search becoming more haphazard as he despairs at the magnitude of the task. Finally, after a dizzy and Groundhog Day like scene of multiple graves passing by he come upon the grave of Arch Stanton, only to find it devoid of any gold, indeed all that remains is a rotting corpse.

Today, this story is echoed in ever IT projects I have ever been a part of, one of my favorites is from within my own group in IBM. It should be noted here that our team is geographically dispersed so although we talk on the phone regularly,we do not get the chance to chew the fat at lunch or around a water cooler. A good friend and colleague of mine on our team, lets call him Bob, was leading the engineering of one the first SOA service registry for an automotive customer in California. One requirement the customer had for the service registry that it performs within certain limits. Unknown to Bob, our group has tackled a very similar problem a couple of years earlier on another engagement. We realized the importance of this work and created a number of assets around it. These assets feel under the broad classification of the requester side caching pattern of which we created pattern specifications, pattern implementation, pattern documentation (including, dW articles, flash movies and a detailed case study). A full listing of these and other pattern asset related articles can be found on my home page.

Bob unaware of the previous asset work we had done in this space and having I am sure ran in circles around his own repository graveyard a number of times, he did what any other good architect would do, he started from scratch and reengineered the exact same asset as we had two years earlier.

Just like Tuco desperately searching Sad Hill for the confederate gold, Bob too faced the same dilemma, in fact I have witnessed that same dilemma on every IT engagement and software project I are involved in. I dare say that this dilemma is not exclusive to IT but that you will find the exact same problem is almost every human endeavor whether it be an engineer building a rocket to put a man on mars to a lawyer drafting claims for a patent application, How do we provide the right assets,the content, to help solve the problem at hand, the context. In other words, how do we automate a context to content mapping to suggest the best assets to our architects, engineers, lawyers to help them?