Next steps (Carry-forward of e-mail thread)

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Ganesh and Sashi Prasad

unread,
Jul 22, 2008, 5:36:37 PM7/22/08
to so...@googlegroups.com


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Peter Svensson <psve...@gmail.com>
Date: 2008/7/23
Subject: Re: [The Wisdom of Ganesh] New comment on New Home for SOFEA, Thin Server Architecture.
To: Ganesh and Sashi Prasad <g.c.p...@gmail.com>
Cc: Justin Meyer <jus...@jupiterit.com>, Mario Valente <mval...@ruido-visual.pt>, Mic Cvilic <michael...@beebole.com>, Yves Hiernaux <yves.h...@beebole.com>


Never mind :) The most important thing is the discussion, not the umbrella.
We'll go with the SOFEA mailing list and that's that.

Cheers,
PS


On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Ganesh and Sashi Prasad <g.c.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter,

Sorry, didn't see the mail from you until after I added the members. I went back to see how I missed it. The first few words were in Swedish so I must have assumed it was spam and didn't look too closely until your latest mail.

I really don't mind going with either Group. Or do you think we need a Group with a more neutral name?

Ganesh

2008/7/23 Peter Svensson <psve...@gmail.com>:

LOL :) Looking right back at you!
Cheers,
PS

Well, never mind, we can go with the SOFEA group, NP.


On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Ganesh and Sashi Prasad <g.c.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now where would we go for a Google Group? :-)

Hang on a minute, I'll send you all an invite.

Regards,
Ganesh

2008/7/23 Justin Meyer <jus...@jupiterit.com>:

Maybe we should move this to a google group?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mario Valente" <mval...@ruido-visual.pt>
To: "Ganesh and Sashi Prasad" <g.c.p...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Peter Svensson" <psve...@gmail.com>; "Justin Meyer" <jus...@jupiterit.com>; "Mic Cvilic" <michael...@beebole.com>; "Yves Hiernaux" <yves.h...@beebole.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [The Wisdom of Ganesh] New comment on New Home for SOFEA, Thin Server Architecture.





 Mic/Yves, I'm CC:ing you the most relevant/summarized message
 on the chat that we've been having on the TSA/SOFEA free for all :-)
 I think that you guys might be interested in the discussion and
 available for contributions...

 -- MV


Ganesh and Sashi Prasad wrote:
Let me refine this slightly with "MUST" and "SHOULD" keywords like they do in standards specifications:

1. Refactoring: Presentation Logic MUST be confined to the client. Business Logic MUST be confined to the server.
=> The client MUST NOT contain any logic other than rendering and (screen)flow logic. The client MUST call services for all business logic.
=> The server side MUST be capable of supporting both visual and non-visual clients.
2. Services: The server SHOULD conform to SOA principles and any of the popular approaches to SOA (SOAP or REST)
3. Clients: The client SHOULD conform to an MVC architecture
4. Client/Server Interface: The interface between the client and the server SHOULD support:
=> rigorously defined data formats
=> rich message exchange patterns (not just request/response)
=> additional qualities of service (security, etc.)
5. Client Deployment: The deployment of the client MUST be through an independent mechanism, i.e., not dependent on the same server that is used to host business logic. (The two capabilities may be co-hosted on the same physical infrastructure but there MUST NOT be any logical dependencies between them.)

I see SOFEA as treating some of the SHOULDs as MUSTs (2 and 4).

Do any of you guys see some of the MUSTs requiring to be diluted to SHOULDs?

Regards,
Ganesh

2008/7/19 Ganesh and Sashi Prasad <g.c.p...@gmail.com <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>:

   Great, then on to the next step!

   Naming Architecture X is a parallel activity to defining exactly
   what it is.

   Here's my initial suggestion on its features:

   1. Refactoring: Clean refactoring of business logic out of the
   client and into server-side "services" (no need to specify here what
   these services should be - SOAP, REST, native, etc. The emphasis is
   on refactoring.)
   Implications:
   => No business logic will be encoded in the client. The client will
   only contain rendering and (screen)flow logic and will call services
   for all business logic.
   => The server side will not contain any presentation logic at all.
   It will support both visual and non-visual clients.
   2. Services: The server should ideally conform to SOA principles and
   any of the popular approaches to SOA (SOAP or REST)
   3. Clients: The client should ideally conform to an MVC architecture
   4. Client/Server Interface: The interface between the client and the
   server should ideally support:
   => rigorously defined data formats
   => rich message exchange patterns (not just request/response)
   => additional qualities of service (security, etc.)
   5. Client Deployment: The deployment of the client should be through
   an independent mechanism, i.e., not dependent on the same server
   that is used to host business logic.

   Is this generic enough? And does it capture the core principles that
   we talked about?


   Regards,
   Ganesh



   2008/7/19 Peter Svensson <psve...@gmail.com
   <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>>:

       Yes!!  Thanks, Ganesh.

       Cheers,
       PS


       On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Ganesh and Sashi Prasad
       <g.c.p...@gmail.com <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>> wrote:

           Yes, that makes perfect sense.

           So are we talking about something like this?

           Architecture X (which we're now looking to name)
             |
             |------ SOFEA (the rigorous variant, not browser-dependent)
             |
             |------ A lightweight variant (using JSON, maybe
           browser-specific)
             |
             |------ Other variant

           I'd be comfortable with this, personally.


           Regards,
           Ganesh

           2008/7/19 Peter Svensson <psve...@gmail.com
           <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>>:

               I hear you, Ganesh. I was more thinking of describing
               things without having to actually define data formats.
               Then we can have specific subsets or variants. Does that
               make sense?

               Also, I think plain SOFEA (or SOFIA as well) still
               sounds OK.

               Cheers,
               PS


               On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Ganesh and Sashi
               Prasad <g.c.p...@gmail.com
               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>> wrote:

                   Peter,

                   I understand your point and can even empathise with
                   your CTO's viewpoint :-). I know there's quite a bit
                   of pressure to just use JSON instead of XML because
                   it's far simpler. Even within our (SOFEA authors)
                   group, there was a fair amount of debate about the
                   JSON-or-XML issue. Ultimately, we saw it as a
                   strength of the architecture to make the
                   Presentation and Business Logic tiers uniform in
                   terms of data integrity (the same XML document
                   payload can pass through unchanged if the designer
                   wants it that way), and we felt that JSON would
                   dilute that integrity at the front-end. We even put
                   in a table of features to explain why we weren't
                   recommending JSON.

                   If we're now going to propose an architecture that
                   includes JSON, then I suggest we maintain a
                   distinction similar to "High REST" (GET, PUT, POST,
                   DELETE) and "Low REST" (only GET and POST). The
                   "High" version of the architecture will involve more
                   effort but will also be more rigorous in terms of
                   data integrity and seamless in its integration with
                   services. The "Low" version will be easier to get
                   started with but offer lower guarantees in the above
                   areas. I would go so far as to warn that it will be
                   no more "service -oriented" than any other MVC-based
                   client architecture used today. It would probably be
                   similar to a Swing/Java Web Start app. You can
                   cleanly refactor the Presentation and Business Logic
                   tiers only if they have a common interface, and I
                   don't see any escape from XML there because nothing
                   else can enforce a contract as rigorously.

                   So are we looking at SOFEA/LFEA (Service-Oriented
                   vs. Lightweight) or something similar?

                   BTW, I don't think we had ever restricted ourselves
                   to supporting browsers. We were always open to both
                   thin and rich clients, is that correct? I know SOFEA
                   certainly doesn't impose that restriction.

                   Regards,
                   Ganesh

                   2008/7/19 Peter Svensson <psve...@gmail.com
                   <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>>:

                       That could work as well. Nice to get a
                       geographical parallel as well.
                       My only remaining gripe with SOFEA as it is
                       (Sorry Ganesh :) is that it is a bit too
                       specific. When I presented the paper to our
                       acting CTO as what I'd like to do, he
                       immediately said that he wanted to use JSON
                       instead of XML.

                       I think that SOFEA is perfect to describe
                       enterprise solutions with lots of existing
                       services, but for a startup with a clear
                       web-based front-end with no prior code or
                       service, the choice of encoding as actually
                       quite arbitrary.

                       So one thing we might toy with (if possible) is
                       to try to generalize the ideas a little bit so
                       to not be dependent on browser as front end or
                       XML as data format.

                       How does that sound??

                       Cheers,
                       PS



                       On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 1:06 AM, Mario Valente
                       <mval...@ruido-visual.pt
                       <mailto:mval...@ruido-visual.pt>> wrote:


                            I really like the SOFEA acronym, except for
                           the fact that its
                            too frontend-oriented/loaded. I really
                           believe that the separation
                            of concerns issue goes beyond the MV in MVC
                           (which is the focus of
                            SOFEA) and that the separation at the VC
                           level is also quite
                            important.

                            SOFIA? As in "Service Oriented F* Interface
                           Architecture"? Feel
                            free to choose your F word :-). For example
                           "Service Oriented
                            Framework for Interfacing Architecture"....

                            Sofia is of course a city at the interface
                           between East and
                            West. Its also a portuguese (and others)
                           girls name. And its
                            greek roots stand for knowledge and wisdom.

                             -- MV




                           Ganesh and Sashi Prasad wrote:

                               It should also sound glamorous. As Bruno
                               Vernay pointed out, AJAX has that
                               certain something. There's a zip in the
                               name. To catch on as a term, people need
                               to be proud of saying, "We've used the
                               <?> architecture."

                               Now I'm not saying this because I made
                               it up, but SOFEA has a bit of that. It
                               gives a tech concept some exotic
                               glamorous mystique similar to aircraft
                               nose art

<http://images.google.com/images?aq=f&um=1&complete=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=aircraft+nose+art&btnG=Search+Images

<http://images.google.com/images?aq=f&um=1&complete=1&hl=en&safe=off&q=aircraft+nose+art&btnG=Search+Images>>,
                               just not as sexist.  I thought of
                               calling it SOPTA (Service-Oriented
                               Presentation Tier Architecture), which
                               is precisely what it is, but the name
                               sounded awful to me. I has also toyed
                               with SOFA (where I treated Front-end as
                               a single word rather than Front-End),
                               but thought SOFEA sounded better in the end.

                               I think we should treat SOFEA as the
                               baseline, and try to think of something
                               better, both in terms of descriptiveness
                               and in punch. We're in the realm of
                               marketing, after all. That's why we
                               included a logo

<http://groups.google.com/group/sofea/web/sofea-logo-256x256.png>
                               and explained its significance at the
                               end of our paper. I know we're geeks and
                               we don't do that sort of thing very
                               well, but maybe our SOs could help here ;-)?


                               As another thought, it doesn't have to
                               be an acronym. By way of example,
                               "Portal" and "Mashup" are pretty popular
                               terms for certain types of UIs. "Portal"
                               was a pretty loose term until 2003, when
                               JSR 168 defined the Portlet API
                               formally. "Mashup" is still a loose term
                               and every vendor and developer uses it
                               to mean what they want. We're providing
                               both the term and its definition. I know
                               these sound awful, but a non-acronymic
                               term like "Tight Client", "Compact
                               Client", "Servee", etc., may be equally
                               valid.

                               And finally, the semi-acronyms: e.g.,
                               ViSCo (Visual Service Consumer) - ugh!
                               REST has legitimised this (It should
                               have been RST).

                               Get those creative juices flowing!

                               Regards,
                               Ganesh

                               2008/7/19 Peter Svensson
                               <psve...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>>>:


                                  I like the Soya beans :) Maybe beans
                               are too Java centric, fo
                                  course, but why not?

                                  Cheers,
                                  PS


                                  On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 5:06 PM,
                               Mario Valente
                                  <mval...@ruido-visual.pt
                               <mailto:mval...@ruido-visual.pt>
                               <mailto:mval...@ruido-visual.pt
                               <mailto:mval...@ruido-visual.pt>>> wrote:



                                       SOIA?  Service Oriented
                               Interface Architecture.

                                       With a double double entendre:
                               1) the I in Interface relates
                                       (or can relate) to both the
                               frontend/businesslogic interface and
                                       to the businesslogic/datalayer
                               interface; 2) the SOIA acronym is
                                       a play on SOA and on soya/soja
                               beans as opposed to coffee/java
                                       beans (as in EJB) ;-)

                                        -- MV


                                      Peter Svensson wrote:

                                          Hmm. I agree. TSA focus on
                               the server (but talks about the
                                          client all the time) and
                               SOFEA focus on the client :) The
                                          problem is, I think that many
                               generic terms (like SOA) are
                                          already abducted. I often use
                               the term "Separation of
                                          Concerns", which is used in
                               various other contexts but also
                                          very generic.

                                          People would probably blow a
                               fuse if we try to use the term
                                          SOA as well :)  But who knows.

                                          Maybe Service Oriented Web
                               Application Architecture? SOWAA ?
                                          That's related to SOFEA, but
                               tells almost nothing about what
                                          it's about, which could be
                               good or bad. Or permutations
                                          along those lines.

                                          We can bounce it back and
                               forth a bit and see what we can
                                          come up with.
                                          I CC the rest of the guys to
                               see if anyone can weigh in.

                                          Cheers,
                                          PS

                                          On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:23
                               PM, Ganesh and Sashi Prasad
                                          <g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>
                                          <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>>>

                                          wrote:

                                             Peter,

                                             Good to hear that you're
                               applying these principles in
                                          real-life.
                                             Vikrant is doing the same
                               at his new employer. Fortunately or
                                             unfortunately, being an
                               architect at a large bank means I
                                          don't get
                                             to be hands-on at all :-(.
                               I just play with code samples
                                          on my home
                                             computer in my spare time,
                               not real applications.

                                             Do you have any ideas for
                               a good name? I think what we're
                                          doing has
                                             significance beyond making
                               the server thin, so maybe TSA
                                          doesn't do
                                             justice to the
                               architecture. I'm not saying SOFEA or
                               SOUI is
                                             necessarily the best name
                               either. We should find a term
                                          that is
                                             broad enough, yet
                               describes it perfectly. If SOA (the
                                          term) turns
                                             out to be a fad, then
                               hitching the name of this
                                          architecture to that
                                             term may affect it
                               negatively. Yet the overall impact of the
                                             architecture is about
                               making the presentation tier a
                                          cleaner client
                                             by factoring out business
                               logic into services. Tradeoffs,
                                          tradeoffs.

                                             Regards,
                                             Ganesh

                                             2008/7/16 Peter Svensson
                               <psve...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>
                                          <mailto:psve...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>>
                                            <mailto:psve...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:psve...@gmail.com>>>>:



                                                 That's so true!
                                                 I've felt so bad
                               slapping together the site like
                                          that, and not
                                                 updating it propely. I
                               am glad, though that we
                                          managed to get
                                                 the article up and
                               that it got seen. However, we
                                          should consider
                                                 a good name, absolutely.

                                                 On the up site, I have
                               managed to be selected
                                          front-end lead on
                                                 a new 'stealth'
                               start-up, where I've managed to separate
                                                 concerns and refered a
                               lot to your articles and my
                                          ramblings :)        It has
                               been well accepted, even though
                                          we're using JSON instead
                                                 of XML, butotherwise OK.

                                                 Hope you are well. I'm
                               in the middle of a Swedish
                                          'long-lunch'
                                                 and a acouple of
                               schnapses, so I hope I'm readable.
                                                 Thansk fo reverything
                               in any case, and now we move
                                          forward.

                                                 Cheers!
                                                 PS


                                                 On Wed, Jul 16, 2008
                               at 1:25 PM, Ganesh and Sashi Prasad
                                                 <g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>
                                          <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>>>

                                          wrote:

                                                     A friendly
                               suggestion from a well-wisher (below) :-)

                                                     ----------
                               Forwarded message ----------
                                                     From: *Bruno
                               Vernay* <noreply...@blogger.com
                               <mailto:noreply...@blogger.com>

<mailto:noreply...@blogger.com
                               <mailto:noreply...@blogger.com>>

<mailto:noreply...@blogger.com
                               <mailto:noreply...@blogger.com>

<mailto:noreply...@blogger.com
                               <mailto:noreply...@blogger.com>>>>
                                                     Date: 2008/7/16
                                                     Subject: [The
                               Wisdom of Ganesh] New comment on
                                          New Home for
                                                     SOFEA, Thin Server
                               Architecture.
                                                     To:
                               g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>
                                          <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>

                                          <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com
                               <mailto:g.c.p...@gmail.com>>>


                                                     Bruno Vernay

<http://www.blogger.com/profile/14452464782395869356>
                               has

                                                     left a new comment
                               on your post "New Home for
                                          SOFEA, Thin
                                                     Server Architecture

<http://wisdomofganesh.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-home-for-sofea-thin-server.html>":



                                                     Should put your blog :

http://wisdomofganesh.blogspot.com/search/label/SOFEA
                                                     and the infoQ article

(http://www.infoq.com/articles/rationalizing-presentation-tier)
                                                     in the article
                               section, no ?
                                                     And most important
                               : choose a name : either
                                          SOFEA, SOUI or
                                                     TSA. Remember what
                               happened with "AJAX".



                                                     Posted by Bruno
                               Vernay to The Wisdom of Ganesh

<http://wisdomofganesh.blogspot.com/> at
                               16/7/08
                                          03:43
























Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages