J OURNAL OF O BJECT T ECHNOLOGY Online at www.jot.fm. Published by ETH Zurich, Chair of Software Engineering ©JOT, 2005
Cite this article as follows: Francisca Losavio, Dinarle Ortega, Maria Pérez: “Comparison of EAI Frameworks”, in Journal of Object Technology, vol. 4, no. 4, May-June 2005, pp. 93-114
www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2005_05/article1
COMPARISON OF EAI FRAMEWORKS such as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) [Sandoe01] and e-business solutions [Whitten04]. The term EAI refers to the plans, methods and tools aimed at modernizing, consolidating, integrating and coordinating IS within an enterprise, where standards play an important role [McKeen02].
One of the most crucial points to achieve EAI, is to combine all the organization assets or expertise, including IT (such as data base technology, distributed and real-time computing, communication technology) and organizational (such as Business Process Reengineering and Workflow Redesign), to support the complexity of all the organizational processes. Notice that the integration of IS requires also more traditional technology like middleware for databases, user interface standards and middleware for real-time and distributed applications, based on adapters and brokers [Themistocleous01].
Since EAI is a new approach to integration, it lacks formalization, organization and unification of the rel
ated concepts [Laudon04], [O’Brien04], [Sandoe01], [Whitten04]. The integration problem has not been entirely resolved and it is still a very expensive process in terms of human and technological efforts. By far, the largest intangible benefit to enterprise integration is the recent improved availability of the information that is shared by the organization using integrated IS and network communication facilities and the establishment of enterprise-wide standards for information resources [Sandoe01]. In consequence, the importance of integrating applications is at present a main concern of the software community, in particular the modeling of EAI for obtaining a more organized and unified view of the main aspects involved. The term framework is considered here as a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality [O’Rourke03]. Important works have been proposed up to now and can be considered for EAI modeling, in particular, the works of [O’Rourke03], [Zachman03], [Whitten04], [Stojanovic01], [Stojanovic02], [Cummins02]. The main goal of this work is to compare an EAI Framework, which will be called EAIF, defined to unify the elements related with processes, services and mechanisms for EAI [Losavio02], [Losavio03], with these related works. Criteria are formulated to identify strength and weakness of these frameworks. EAIF was constructed extending the known Brown’s Conceptual Model of Integration (BCMI) [Brown94]. As a result of the comparison, EAIF has been enriched with the “human aspects” feature.
This paper is structured as follows, besides this introduction and the conclusion: Section 2 describes EAIF. Section 3 presents a survey on common IS modeling frameworks that can be also used to model EAI: the Zachman, Whitten, Cummins and Zoran’s frameworks. Section 4 presents an analysis of Zachman, Whitten, Cummins and Zoran’s frameworks vs. EAIF. Section 5 contains the comparison of the frameworks studied, on the base of the comparison criteria formulated.
In what follows, the main characteristics of EAIF are presented.
94J OURNAL OF O BJECT T ECHNOLOGY V OL.4, NO.4
COMPARISON OF EAI FRAMEWORKS
V OL.4, NO.4 J OURNAL OF O BJECT T ECHNOLOGY95web下载官方下载
COMPARISON OF EAI FRAMEWORKS
96J OURNAL OF O BJECT T ECHNOLOGY V OL.4, NO.4
COMPARISON OF EAI FRAMEWORKS
V OL.4, NO.4 J OURNAL OF O BJECT T ECHNOLOGY97
COMPARISON OF EAI FRAMEWORKS
98J OURNAL OF O BJECT T ECHNOLOGY V OL.4, NO.4

版权声明：本站内容均来自互联网，仅供演示用，请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系QQ:729038198，我们将在24小时内删除。