Industry players must reach consensus on SOA definition
John Schlesinger, chief architect at Temenos, feels that the term ‘SOA’ is being bandied around far too much in banking, tarnishing the image of the pioneering architecture when projects go wrong. August 29, 2012 | John SchlesingerService-oriented architecture (SOA) is without question the technology framework of choice for most pioneering banks. Its principle is sound: design software in independent, discrete service components, in order to make these components reusable, bank-wide. This reuse is the driver for SOA – it will dramatically reduce costs for banks, which need not reinvent processes, and also promote best practices within a bank. However, problems have arisen as a result of the various definitions of SOA. As there is no agreed industry standard definition, Temenos, other vendors and banks may have different ideas on what constitutes an SOA framework. There are many definitions used in the world of technology, each with a subtle difference to the one before it. However, many consider the IBM reference architecture as a sound starting point for SOA definition. When building within a framework dubbed SOA, many architects do not actually perform integration tasks, which are a core component feature of an architecture that permits complete communication between systems and users. In some cases, where architects believe they are performing integration between systems, they are effectively carrying out new application development. Typically though, if it works, it gets called SOA. Banking architecture styles should always include three points of definition: the sets of elements that make up the style; the ways in which these elements relate to each other; and the constraints within those relationships. Unfortunately, these three definitions are not usually completely fulfilled in the many descriptions of SOA that are used within banking. There have been a number of issues with SOA definition in the past. A major confusion is the failure to distinguish between interaction and integration. By failing to distinguish between the two, it is not possible to separate transactio... Please login to read the complete article. If you already have an account, you can login now or subscribe/register.
Categories: Innovation, Technology & OperationsInnovation,technology, Innovation,Technology & Operations, Keywords:SOA, Temenos, John Schlesinger, Application Development, Banking Architecture, Integration, Interaction, IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, Banque Libano-Francaise, SaaS SOA, Temenos, John Schlesinger, Application Development, Banking Architecture, Integration, Interaction, IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, Banque Libano-Francaise, SaaS
|