Model-Driven SOA
OMG SOA SIG Activity Debrief
June 28th 2007
Dr. Harsh W. Sharma, Co-Chair, OMG SOA SIG
James Odell, Co-Chair, OMG SOA SIG
Pete Rivett, Chair-Emeritus, OMG SOA SIG
Agenda
 SOA
Challenge
 OMG SOA SIG: Mission & Participants
 OMG’s approach to SOA & Value
Proposition
 Summary of gap analysis effort
 Summary of Standards in development
 SOA Standards Harmonization activity
 SIG Next Steps
2
SOA Challenge
http://www.innoq.com/soa/ws-standards/poster/
 Inadequate emphasis on
Business & Architectural
aspects of SOA
 Poor (if any) traceability
of Services to business
processes & functions,
compliance..
 Many standards organizations are developing standards with
possible overlaps and rapid churn
 Vendors are repositioning their products as SOA enabled, end-toend solution and takeovers leaving the Consumer with the burden
to identify the best of breed solution
 ..We know this already…so what is OMG doing?
3
SOA SIG Mission & Participants
Mission
Participants

MDA
EA/Business Models
BPM
Other…
Relational
EDA
SOA
.NET

Support a Model Driven
Architecture (MDA) approach to
SOA that links architectural,
business and technology views of
Services, including Business
Process Management (BPM) and
Event-Driven Architecture (EDA)
Identify and foster development of
OMG modeling standards for SOA
that integrate with and
complement standards developed
by other organizations such as
W3C, Open Group and OASIS…
J2EE

Implementation Stacks
IBM, HP, SAP, BEA, Unisys, EDS, RTI, Model Driven Systems, Adaptive, MEGA, MetLife, VISA,
Bank of America, CitiGroup, Boeing, Raytheon, Rhysome, AptSoft, XAware, SOA COP, SOA
Consortium, The Open Group, OASIS, Satyam, US EPA, ebizQ, Georgetown University, NIST,
Liberty-Mutual, Penn National, Prima-Solutions, OSOA, Nortel, Indiana University…
4
Model Driven Architecture: “The DNA of SOA”



Addresses information modeling &
Other.
metadata exchange
.
Traceability of information
MOF/XMI
(source to targets)
Facilities for defining, interchanging, transformation
Meta Object Facility


Security, Performance,
Testing, Compliance
Modeling
Common Warehouse
Metamodel/Information
Management Metamodel (IMM)
Application, Service,
Event Modeling

Addresses system modeling
Information Modeling

Process Modeling
Unified Modeling Language
Business Modeling
(motivation, Intent..)

and managing
All models and metamodels
Addresses the definition of modeling
languages (metamodels)
Integration, interchange and
management of models
Core MDA Standards are ISO Standards
5
OMG’s Approach & Value Proposition

While other organizations have focused on specific
standards for integration or web services protocols
(e.g., WS-* standards), OMG complements their
efforts by taking a Platform Independent View and
applying a Modeling Approach to SOA
Modeling is OMG’s Core Competence
 Modeling
offers the capability to design a complete SOA
solution
 Intellectual property documented through models can have
a longer lifespan, allowing an organization a choice of the
best technical platform for SOA implementation
6
SOA Related Business Modeling Standards

Business Motivation Model (BMM)


Semantics for Business Vocabulary and Rules (SBVR)


Platform independent model for executable rules
Business Process Runtime Interface (BPRI)*


Notation and platform independent process modeling and interchange
Production Rules Representation (PRR)*


Existing standard from BPMI.org (merged into OMG)
Business Process Definition Metamodel (BPDM)


Combines natural language expression with precise logical underpinning
Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN)


Mission, goals and objectives for an organization linked to external factors
Platform independent interfaces to running processes
Organization Structure Metamodel (OSM)*

Organizations, relationships, positions and roles
*in development
7
SOA Related Technology Modeling Standards

UML
Architecture and design of services/internals
 General purpose modeling language (via UML Profiles)


Reusable Asset Specification (RAS)


CWM and forthcoming Information Management
Metamodel (IMM)


Modeling Ontology of ‘Services’ and Events’
Facilitate development of Semantic Web Services
Knowledge Discovery Metamodel (KDM)


Service Payloads (information content) and mapping to enterprise data sources
Ontology Definition Metamodel (ODM)



Packaging of reusable assets for retrieval, usage and deployment
Models of the enterprise systems to which services typically map
Software Process Engineering Metamodel (SPEM)

Modeling the SOA development process (Service Life cycle)
8
SOA and Information Modeling: IMM Overview
Information Management Metamodel (IMM)
XSD
Cobol
Data Division
SQL DDL
XML
Modeling
UML2 Profiles
Record
Object Oriented
Structure
Database
Modeling
Modeling
Express
Database
Modeling
LDAP
Modeling
Optional Components (Metamodels)
Record
Object Oriented
Structures
Database
Modeling
Modeling
Express
Database
Modeling
LDAP
Modeling
Relational
Modeling Notation for IE,
Support for Methods…
Mandatory Components (Metamodels)
ER
Modeling
(Logical)
Relational
Modeling
(Physical)
XML
Modeling
Extended Scope
CWM Packages
Multidimensional, Data Mining, OLAP,
ETL Transformations,
Warehouse Process, Operations…
(Carry- Forward, with minor changes)
MOF QVT : Metamodel <> UML Profile
ER
Relational
Modeling Modeling
Other..
IMM Foundation
Meta Object Facility (MOF2)
9
OMG Standards apply to all layers of SOA
http://www.omg.org/attachments/pdf/OMG-and-the-SOA.pdf
BPMN
Business
Process
UML
BPDM
SBVR
Task
definition
Interfaces defined by enterprise context
Task
implementation
ODM
UML
Business
Services
RAS
Interfaces defined by enterprise semantics and requirements
J2EE UML
Profile
Components
CORBA
UML Profile
CWM/
IMM
KDM
Operational
Resources
Servers
Mainframes
Servers
Data
Data
Data
Mainframes
Data
10
Summary of Gap Analysis Effort
Modeling approach to SOA*
 Service Traceability to Business Processes*
 Service Relationship to Events*
 Need to Harmonize development of SOA
Standards*
 Service Discovery & Assets
 SOA Life Cycle Metrics and Maturity
 SOA Governance & Compliance

* Gaps OMG SOA SIG started working on
11
Standards in Development

UML Profile and Metamodel for Software Services
(UPMS) RFP
 MOF
metamodel and equivalent UML2 profile
 Extend, but not conflict with UML semantics
 Notation icons for services extensions
http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?soa/06-09-09

Event Driven Architecture (EDA) and its relationship
with SOA, BPM – RFP (to be issued in Dec. 07)
 Addresses
Event vocabulary, relationship between EDA,
BPM and SOA




Event Metamodel and UML Profile
Event metadata exchange using standard formats like XMI
Event Traceability and causality in relation to Services
Processing of complex events
12
UPMS Goals (submission in progress)






A common vocabulary and metamodel to unify the diverse
service definitions that exist in the industry
Complement existing UML metamodel by defining an
extension to UML to ensure complete and consistent service
specifications and implementations
Integrate with and complement standards developed by other
organizations such as W3C and OASIS
Support a service contract describing the collaboration
between participating service consumers and service
providers
Enable traceability between contracts specifying services
requirements, service specifications that fulfill those
requirements and service providers that realize service
specifications
The ability to exchange services models between tools using
XMI
13
Who is working on UPMS?
















IBM
Adaptive
Cap Gemini
EDS
HP
Model Driven Solutions
Telelogic
BAE Systems
Azora
everware-cbdi
France Telecom R&D
The Thales Group
European Software Institute,
Softteam,
Rhysome and
MIDt








SINTEF
University of Augsburg,
NKUA – University of Athens
German Research Center for
Artificial Intelligence (DFKI)
Oslo Software
DERI (University of Innsbruck)
Fujitsu
Mega International
14
Agenda
 SOA
Challenge
 OMG SOA SIG: Mission & Participants
 OMG’s approach to SOA & Value
Proposition
 Summary of gap analysis effort
 Summary of Standards in development
 SOA Standards Harmonization activity
 Next steps
15
SOA Standards Harmonization Activity: Drivers
 Many standards organizations are developing standards with
possible overlaps and rapid churn
 “Just the mere number of standards and specifications that
one has to consider when attempting SOA is mind numbing”..




Which ones are specifications (not yet standards) submitted to standard
bodies?
Which ones are specifications ratified by the standard bodies as industry
standards?
Which ones (standards or specifications) overlap (some do) and which to
choose / use in such cases?
And worst of all, there is not a single place to go to for these
standards!
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/alur?entry=soa_standards_overload_or_real

“Given the proliferation of SOA standards, there is an
opportunity to take a step back and provide some perspective
on all the SOA standards that exist…”
http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid26_gci1244481,00.html?track=NL-110&ad=581964&asrc=EM_NLN_1076649&uid=783626
16
SOA Standards Harmonization Activity: Mission

Enable various standards organizations to reconcile
their SOA efforts and offer clarity to the end-users
lost in the maze of SOA standards

Prioritize and foster development of standards
applicable to Business and Technology Dimensions of
SOA

Enable standards organizations to become trusted
advisors to the SOA community
17
How do we Harmonize?

Develop and maintain an authoritative source of SOA and
related standards (SOA Standards Knowledgebase)
Sponsored by OMG SOA SIG, being developed collaboratively with other
standards organizations
 Map SOA standards (proposed, in development or adopted) to ‘SOA
Perspectives’




Business Perspective: Motivation (mapping Services to Business Functions),
legal/compliance, Cost, discovery*, maturity*…
Architectural Perspective: Reference Models, Design-patterns…
IT Perspective



Information Perspective (Service Payload): Data Distribution, Domain Standards…
Developer Perspective: Orchestration, Security, Protocols…
Publish a roadmap of who is developing which category of SOA standards
*can apply to more than one Perspective

For each Standard:


Name, description, current release/version (as applicable)
Life-cycle status (proposed, RFI, RFP, initial submission, adopted…)


Timeline
Responsible Organization
Link to the organization and its SOA standards roadmap, noteworthy news
(RSS feeds to keep the information current)

18
19
20
Harmonization Activity: other examples



Use of OASIS’ SOA reference model and vocabulary in OMG’s
SOA standards development as applicable
Discussions started with Everware-CBDI to harmonize their
SOA metamodels with the OMG’s UPMS (additional joint RFP
planned)
OMG working with Events Processing Technical Society (EPTS)
on the development of modeling standards for EDA/CEP

The goal of EPTS is to promote the understanding of the “event
processing” area, its potential impact and serve as a catalyst to the
growth and understanding of the area by the general technical and
business community

Collaborating with The Events Processing Reference Architecture Working
Group on CEP/EDA patterns and extensions to OMG standards relevant to
events processing
21
SIG next steps
UPMS adoption- March 2008
 EDA RFP- to be issued in Dec. 2007, initial
submission March 2008
 SOA Standards Knowledgebase – in
development, beta rollout Sept.-Oct. 2007
 Domain specific ‘Business Services’

 Insurance

Define Property and Casualty Services – RFP planned


Scope discussion planned for Sept. SOA SIG-OMG Insurance
WG meeting
White paper “Business Agility: Is SOA Enough”
–by SOA SIG, Sept. 2007
22
FYI

OMG SOA SIG (http://soa.omg.org ) meets every Tuesday at
the quarterly OMG technical meetings (for 2007 calendar:
http://www.omg.org/news/schedule/upcoming.htm )

Upcoming SOA Information Day

Sept. 25, 2007 (part of OMG Technical meeting, Jacksonville, FL, USA)


Joint session with OMG Insurance Working Group
Mailing list: soa@omg.org (to join, please send email to:
request@omg.org )
23
Thanks for
your Time..
Contact Info:
harsh_sharma@omg.org
email@jamesodell.com
Pete.rivett@adaptive.com
24