On June 27, I'll be sharing my views on the relationship between SOA and EDA (peers and complements) with the OMG's SOA SIG during the OMG Technical Meeting to be held in Boston. The SOA SIG co-chairs, Dr. Harsh Sharma and James ODell asked me to share (evangelize?) why I believe EDA is important, and to speak to the SOA-EDA relationship from an architectural (not product) point-of-view. Not a problem :)
Following my talk, the group will be discussing requirements for EDA related standards. Ok, I can hear some of you groaning. Yes, our industry is notorious for setting overly complicated standards (WS-*) before fully understanding the problem space and the intentions of practitioners.
But maybe we can change that. Give practitioners the opportunity to share real requirements from the field. So, here's my suggestion/request. If you are an EDA practitioner, and you have some thoughts on EDA standards - areas you think standards would help, and areas you think standards would be a hindrance - please let me know. Either comment on this post, or through email: bda at elementallinks dot com.
I'll serve as the practitioner conduit on EDA for the SOA-SIG. As for my own thoughts on EDA standards, as I've written previously, I see gaps in event specification and processing notation.
For more on the SOA-SIG check out this new pdf.
