I have one question concerning the SCA. For me SCA is not easy to
clutch. When I've designed my business processes with the BPMN editor,
with the Intermediate Model I get an elementary SCA diagram,
representing my SOA architecture.
But is SCA really representing my SOA architecture? Isn't anything
missing? What about infrastructure components like UDDI, ESB etc?
SCA only shows which services I have and how they depend on each other.
Is this already a complete SOA architecture?
My problem is that I see SCA more as a programming paradigm than an
architecture language.
With SCA I easily can wire services together and connect components with
implementations etc. It is a paradigm to write applications in a service
oriented way. As we can see, there are bindings for java, C, php etc.
(but not .net)
Is this the same as designing the architecture for a SOA? In my view,
SCA is more on a lower level for developing applications than for upper
level work like designing the architecture.
Maybe an UML component diagram which doesn't contain implementation
details and bindings details is more suitable for this job?
Because SCA contains a lot of lets say platform specific information.