Occurrences in ARIS SOA Architect

Hello Ivo,

not sure what behavior you're referring to. I'm not aware that we are differentiating one object at different occurences. Could you please give me an example where you have seen this?

Second question: what are you expectations to a SOA Manual or SOA content? I think we have a very detailed help in our documentation but of course we're always open for proposals.

Regards

Uwe

If I’ve got it right, I can offer two methods to label different occurrences. To indicate new state of information carriers you can use Technical terms model (see figure).

Another way is to use colors for Occurrences, this approach could be used for objects with minimum differentiation of state. For example, we use color to identify “cycle” events on EPC, and “our” events have two states: standard and yellow. Of course, this approach needs to make conventions careful. But it could be process by evaluation scripts.

@Uwe, I'm referring to the UMG demo database. In the service types tree, the change credit application service type has business objects "Credit application:in" and "Credit application:out" and in the repository there is one cluster object "Credit application". So my first reaction was there is a way to differentiate different states of business objects without linking different occurrences to different states.

@Alexander, colouring can't help for analysis as the visual part is actualy of little importance. But your suggestion was helpful as now that an alternative would be to use different symbol which could be used in queries and reports.

@Uwe, the SOA Architect help contains SOA-relevant content in the folder "Create service oriented models". Is there more SOA-related content outside this forlder. If not, it's far from detailed. I can make a parallel with ARIS IT Architect where there is also very little specific information in the Help but there is a manual. The first version of that manual was of little use but then some months ago appeared a really comprehensive one. So, what am I looking for is a SOA Arch. manual which could be as helpful for using ARIS SOA Architect as is the IT Arch. manual for using ARIS IT Architect. Sorry for not being specific but I'm pressed for time just now.

Regards

Ivo

One remark. Coloring could be used for analysis, as example we usual use colors for events to mark cycles on EPC models. This way is very useful for ABC analysis by scripts – to identify functions inside of cycle and to weigh functions on cycle coefficient. But of course using of objects’ colors must be minimum.

Don't get me wrong, Alexander. Colouring could be very useful and although I have not used it in the examples you provide, the way it's implemented in the process support map and lifecycle analysis in ITA is great. It's just that I don't find it appropriate to idetify states at conceptual level. Then at logical level, essepcially using UML there are of course good ways to handle it.

Hi Ivo,

thanks for the example, now I can explain waht happes there.

The Service View is a special view that works on the ARIS repository and displays the information in a special way. In the described case the Cluster 'Credit application' is attached twice to the Business Service. One time with a 'is input for' connection and one time with a 'has output of' connection. We use the existance of these two connections to display two nodes in the tree, one with addendum   :in, the other with :out. So there is no occurence specific behavior. Sorry to disappoint you ;-)

Regards

Uwe

Thank you, Uwe!

Regarding the need for a manual. Here's one example for which I couldn't find infromation in the help: I'm quite confused by the allowed connection types of Service Type object. It all fits well with capabilities, KPIs, clusters, org. units, software service type. But I'm getting a little bit confused when it comes to Product/Service:

1. What is the difference between a Service (which, before the advent of ARIS SOA Architect was the right object to represent Business Service) and Service Type used as a Business Service? It seems that a Service is not an instance of the Service Type which concept is maintained in the method for other ARIS objects.

2. Why the connection type between the two is "realizes"? Can you give me an example where a Product/Service can realize a Business Service (Service Type)?

3. Why a business function can be supported by Business Service but cannot realize Business Service? This is a connection type supported (and very logical and useful in my opinion) by the EA notations like Archimate? The SOA method in ARIS was said to be compatible with EA. Yet it seems it isn't or I don't get it right. Please help!

Regards

Ivo

Hi Ivo,

a business service is only a conceptual object. A product/service is something which exists and can be sold. Therefore, you can offer a business service as a product.

About the naming of the connection types: We discussed that for a very long time. It is clear that all those "realization" connection types should have the same name, but that would have meant to introduce several new connection types to the ARIS method. On the contrary, we try to prevent method bloat. So we had to find a compromise and in that case we decided against introducing new connection types and instead reused the existing ones. Personally, I suggest to rename them in a filter so that it is more consistent if you are doing an SOA project.

Hello Ivo,

I think the tipps from Sebastian are helpful but will not solve all your problems. I agree that an extended SOA documentation would be helpful and consider your input in the next development phases.

Regards

Uwe

Sebastian,

I understand that business service is only a conceptual object. But shouldn't the method consistency be better kept if the Product/Service connection type to Service Type is "is of type"? And I still think that both connection types "supported by" and "realizes" should be maintened in the method between function and business service. Take for example a most common business service provided by a bank like "money transfer". It could have bank office realization with a Service/product "remittance order" (is that a proper usage of the connection between these two object types?) and on-line realization represented by application system type "online transfer". However, this business service supports a client process but in some cases it is more important at conceptual level to show that it is realised by a vendor process, the vendor being the bank in this example. Such representations is especially relevant for e-Government implementations. (By the way is SOA Architect used in such projects so far?) And anyway, ARIS supports it already but only within Archimate method and in service allocation diagram, while  in VACD, EPC and FAD the only allowed connection type between Function and Service Type is "supports".

There is one more thing I miss as well: to have "business service support" map with the same functionality as "process support map". The business service is allowed but the standard macros are not configured to support business services instead of functions.

Don't get me wrong. I think you've done a great job with ARIS SOA Architect. It just needs some small things to be better aligned with EA.

Uwe, one improvement of the SOA help that could be really very helpful is to add a method diagram in SOA modeling convention section that shows all allowed connection types within a certain model. This actually is missing in the method help as well, there are only examples given there, not meta-models. So I usually end up experimenting  or searching in the annexes of the Method manual, both being quite time consuming.

Regards

Ivo

Hi Ivo,

I agree with you that the integration of SOA and EA methodology can be enhanced and appreciate your valuable input. To offer a Business Service Support Map seems like a good idea. Also we will follow the proposal how to improve the SOA help.

About the first requirement I have to think for a while. It might become a philosophic discussion if a service only supports a process step (function) or if he's implementing it. I'm not sure if there are enough good arguments to differentiate between the two connection types or if in most cases the semantic between supports and realizes is the same.

Let me do some internal discussion and come back to you after them.

Regards

Uwe

Hello Ivo,

I'd like to go a little bit more into detail regarding your questions 2 and 3 from 2009/09/29.

2. The 'realizes'-connection type is kind of a relict from the starting phase of our SOA methodology. At this time we planned a much broader approach than it has been realized later. Currently my proposal is, not to use product/service in the SOA context.

3. From my point of view 'supports' and 'implements' between function and business service are only two sides of the medal. We want to express that a business service supports a function in the meaning of execution. So a business service must be able to execute this process step. Of course this function can be detailed by an executable process (e.g. BPEL), this process can be considered as a software service and this software service realizes the business service. So we use the realizes connection type, but not directly between function and business service but indirect via software service and executable process.

I hope this helps to understand our methodical approach in the SOA area a bit better, but of course you can come back anytime to me.

Regards

Uwe

Hi Ivo,

may be I'm to late for this discussion but on your first question:

In my practice I usually put the information concerning the state of the object in unspecified attribute in the connection between this object and object of type "Function".

And this way of representation fits very well with different types of analysis and reports.

BR

Thanx, Todor

No, it's never late for a good idea :)

Cheers

Ivo