I have also been following Service Modeling Language and it’a not ovcious to me what the linkage is between Microsoft’s membership of OMG and SML given that they are operating in different domains. Those domains should be related if the end-to-end lifecyle management of software, from development through to operations, is to be achieved but I am don’t think that relationship has been clearly established, yet – by Microsoft let alone the broader community. Does it have anything to do with the fact that IBM is also involved in SML? I (and I am sure others) would be interested in your insights.

I have also been following Service Modeling Language and it’a not ovcious to me what the linkage is between Microsoft’s membership of OMG and SML given that they are operating in different domains. Those domains should be related if the end-to-end lifecyle management of software, from development through to operations, is to be achieved but I am don’t think that relationship has been clearly established, yet – by Microsoft let alone the broader community. Does it have anything to do with the fact that IBM is also involved in SML? I (and I am sure others) would be interested in your insights.

It’s worth looking into what happened at DMTF with WSDM and WS-Management. WSDM was not a DMTF standard but there was some agreement to use it as SOAP-based management protocol.

Microsoft did what was needed to get DMTF to throw this away (in practice, not officially) and instead take Microsoft’s WS-Management as a replacement.

You can call this “Microsoft’s commitment to DMTF” if you want. But it’s a commitment to the org after they reshape it, not to the org as it stood before. Same thing might apply to OMG now. We’ll see.

In effect, their success with DMTF might be the precedent that makes them confident that they can walk into an org in which IBM has a lot of influence and take over control from them.

I am also surprised that no-one is talking about what this OMG move means for SML, now at W3C.

And just to be clear, all in all I still think it would be a good thing for Microsoft to engage the OMG with its recent modeling efforts. I too am intrigued by Oslo.

PS: I have all kinds of personal involvement with the specs mentioned above. Definitely not a neutral observer.

It’s worth looking into what happened at DMTF with WSDM and WS-Management. WSDM was not a DMTF standard but there was some agreement to use it as SOAP-based management protocol.

Microsoft did what was needed to get DMTF to throw this away (in practice, not officially) and instead take Microsoft’s WS-Management as a replacement.

You can call this “Microsoft’s commitment to DMTF” if you want. But it’s a commitment to the org after they reshape it, not to the org as it stood before. Same thing might apply to OMG now. We’ll see.

In effect, their success with DMTF might be the precedent that makes them confident that they can walk into an org in which IBM has a lot of influence and take over control from them.

I am also surprised that no-one is talking about what this OMG move means for SML, now at W3C.

And just to be clear, all in all I still think it would be a good thing for Microsoft to engage the OMG with its recent modeling efforts. I too am intrigued by Oslo.

PS: I have all kinds of personal involvement with the specs mentioned above. Definitely not a neutral observer.