RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

Welcome back Steve.

 

I'll 
may help with the DSL, what are your plans for it?

 

Thanks,

 

- 
Dan

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones, Steve G 
  [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 
  2005 5:09 PM
To: ; ; 
  ; ; 
  
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] 
  Microsoft Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

  

  
I think NNL sits at a 
  higher and more abstract level than the SOA Blueprints and normally needs to 
  be combined with an AIM (Alcohol Ingestion Methodology) 
   J

  
 

  
On SDM/DSI one thing 
  that is “interesting” is that it’s starting from the bottom and trying to work 
  upwards.  Its going to be very interesting to see how it climbs up the 
  stack towards SOA from a product centric approach.  

  
 

  
On the DSL element, 
  I’ll be looking at how to represent the SOA methodology using a DSL in the 
  next couple of months (anyone want to help?) but I’m not sure how this will 
  drive Service Orientation throughout DSI, its unclear whether it’s a 
  generational or decoration model, if it’s the former then I’d be very 
  sceptical at it succeeding in its aims.  I agree entirely at looking at 
  this in a vendor agonstic fashion and MOST importantly driving from the top 
  down and STARTING with services rather than retro-fitting them into an 
  architecture.  On element that surprises me with all vendors who claim to 
  do SOA is that none have a tool suite that starts with 
  Services.

  
 

  
However… MOTION is 
  sort of related to this but at the same time not.  It’s a Microsoft 
  Consulting Services offer that is only available if you employ them rather 
  than being something that Microsoft are rolling into the product 
  stack.

  
 

  

  

  

  
  

  
From:  
  [mailto:] 
Sent: 02 November 2005 23:59
To: ; 
  ; ; ; 
  
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft 
  Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

  
 

  

  
What Steve doesn't 
  have napkins where he is?

  

  
 

  

  
I am interested in 
  Steve presenting NNL (Napkin Notation Language) as 
  well.

  

  
 

  

  
:)

  

  
 

  

  
- 
  Dan

  

  
 

  

  
 

  
    
-----Original 
    Message-----
From: Miko 
    Matsumura [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 3:26 
    PM
To: 
    ; ; ; 
    
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft 
    Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

    
Hi Mike and 
    company,

    
 

    
I'm looking forward 
    to discussing and resolving the "layers" approach which is implicit in the 
    MW2 consulting blueprints (distinct from the OASIS blueprint effort, just 
    sharing the name) and how this can inform the path towards stratifying the 
    appropriate architectural models, patterns and practices.

    
 

    
I'm also looking 
    forward to seeing Steve demonstrate his notation and methodology on 
    Coalogic, although I understand he is travelling and may be unable to draw 
    for us at the moment.

    
 

    
Best,

    
Miko

    
 

    

    
    

    
From:  
    [mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 3:05 
    PM
To: 
    ; ; ; 
    
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft 
    Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

    

    
This is a very 
    interesting evolution in our direction.

    

    
When I get time 
    next week I will toss more things on the wiki helping to flush out the 
    Coalogic example in this way.

    

    
 

    

    
- 
    Dan

    
-----Original 
      Message-----
From: 
      Morris, Michael [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 
      12:41 PM
To: 
      ; ; 
      
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] 
      Microsoft Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

      
There are some very interesting approaches that 
      Microsoft is taking across the stack here.  They are really pushing 
      their System Definition Model as a part of their DSI strategy to model 
      (hardware, applications, IT web services, etc) from the infrastructure 
      domain.

      
 

      
Granted, you have to use all Microsoft tools (eg. 
      Visual Studio 2005, Virtual Server 2005, etc) but they do provide a DSL 
      builder to allow others to create tools that generate models that can be 
      leveraged in other modeling environments.

      
 

      
I'd like to see if we may want to take a vendor 
      agnostic modeling approach with the SOA Blueprint:   
      

      
*   Start with the business problem and 
      define it

      
*   lets model a business problem 
      utilizing a set of business tools - use CapGemini's contribution and put 
      this metadata in a model.   

      
*   Then can we find the right DSLs 
      (they don't have to be Microsoft) that produce artifacts for every "layer" 
      of the architecture that we can tie together in a reference solution model 
      to solve that particular business problem.    
      

      
*   We can utilize a semantic 
      integration approach to tie together multiple models

      
*   Package this as a best practice 
      approach to the industry

      
 

      
just an idea on an approach...

      
 

      
Thoughts?

      
 

      
Mike

      
 

      
 

      

      

      
      

      
From:  
      [mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 
      11:36 AM
To: 
      ; 
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] 
      Microsoft Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

      
 

      

      
 

      

      
 

      

      
Here is more food 
      for thought:

      

      
- http://blogs.msdn.com/askburton/articles/330974.aspx

      

      
- http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnvsent/html/vsts-msf.asp

      

      
 

      

      
 

      
        
-----Original 
        Message-----
From: John 
        Harby [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 
        10:41 AM
To: 
        
Subject: Re: [soa-blueprints] 
        Microsoft Motion Modeling Methodology (M*4?)

        

        
Hasn't Rational XDE been covering that 
        one?
[Marchant, Dan 
        R.] Yes but it doesn't have microsoft's plan for world domination 
        in mind. Starbucks and Microsoft should probably merge at some 
        point.

      
        

        
 

        

        
On 11/2/05, Duane Nickull <> 
        wrote: 

        
This is old news.  Visio has been 
        doing UML models since they bought it.
The concept of linking that to 
        a .NET IDE is cool IMO.

Duane

-----Original 
        Message-----
From: Porch Robert [mailto: ]
Sent: 
        Wednesday, November 02, 2005 9:18 AM
To: ; ; Duane 
        Nickull 
Cc: 
Subject: 
        RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft Motion Modeling 
        Methodology
(M*4?)

I believe that you may be very close based 
        on what I have seen. 

-----Original Message-----
From:  
        [mailto:]
Sent: 
        Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:25 AM 
To: ; 
Cc:  
        
Subject: RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft Motion Modeling 
        Methodology
(M*4?)

I believe this is the major tool initiative 
        they are working on for the
end of the year or q1 next year 
        release.
Think of RUP with a microsoft toolset and microsoft 
        framework applied to 
it.

That is basically what they are 
        looking at doing I believe.

But I can neither confirm or deny 
        this :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Miko Matsumura 
        [mailto: 
        ]
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 9:54 
        AM
To: Duane Nickull
Cc: 
Subject: 
        RE: [soa-blueprints] Microsoft Motion Modeling Methodology 
        
(M*4?)

Anyone have any insights on this?

http://weblogs.asp.net/omagnusson/archive/2005/07/28/420856.aspx

Microsoft 
        Motion Business Modeling Methodology 

At the Tech Ed 2005 Europe 
        Architecture pre-con Beat Schegler and
Arvindra Sehmi talked about a 
        methodology framework that MCS have been
working on called Motion 
        which is supposed to be:

"The Motion Methodology uses the concept 
        of Business Capabilities to 
model a business. A Capability describes 
        the what, not the how. A
Capabilities Model abstracts structural 
        information (capabilities and
connections) separately from dynamic 
        information (processes)"

Motion decomposes the whole business 
        into capabilities on many levels of 
granularity ( level 1-3), where 
        level 1 represents core business
capabilities (eg. Warehousing), 
        level 2 represents capability groups
(eg. Manage Products/Orders) and 
        level 3 represent the business
capabilities (order products, track 
        etc. ). Each business capability 
then has 80 attributes which 
        describe it, such as who owns it, input and
outputs, best practices 
        and exceptions.

On top of this we then layer our business 
        processes. which manage and
orchestrate messages going between these 
        business capabilities. 

The Framework is supposed to come with a 
        complete set of deliverables
templates and tasks and a unique "go in, 
        go up, go out" approach to
modeling these business capabilities and 
        processes, FAQs, case studies 
and the while shebang.

When 
        goggling around for this, I've not been able to come up with
anything 
        so far. Are there any news on this, when this will be released
and to 
        whom ? Will it be publicly available like MSF or only to partners 
        
?

I can see the tooling for this going hand in hand with DSL 
        tools in the
future.
posted on Thursday, July 28, 2005 1:30 
        PM

        
 

  
    
    

      This message contains 
        information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property 
        of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is 
        addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized 
        to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this 
        message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, 
        please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this 
        message.