2. The composite service CO3 is transformed to the atomic service A-CO3 because all its
internal services are removed.
3. The composite service CO5 aggregated two more atomic services (A8 and A9) that were
initially internal to composite service CO1.
Consider the following five steps that were taken to accommodate a proper solution to the
problem described in Exhibit 8.12:
1. The CO2 composite service was eliminated by employing the subtracted analysis operation
symbol. Note that the proposition does not include CO2.
2. The services CO3, CO5, A8, and A9 were decoupled from the composite service CO1
by utilizing the decomposed analysis operation.
3. Atomic services A8 and A9 were aggregated into composite service CO5.
4. Composite service CO4 was decoupled from composite service CO3.
5. As a result of the decomposition operation in step 4, the composite service CO3 was
transformed into atomic service A-CO3.
Summary 167
CO1
CO2 CO3 CO5 A8 A9
CO4 A-CO3
1
2
3 4
5
EXHIBIT 8.12 USE CASE H: LOOSE COUPLING STRATEGY
DELIVERABLES
The modeling process requires delivery of an analysis proposition diagram that identifies all the
candidate services for participating in a solution. There are thee major guiding rules that can
facilitate an effective analysis diagram:
1. Employ the analysis modeling language to articulate the remedies that are proposed.
2. Study the modeling language rules and apply them while implementing the modeling
process.
Pages:
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302