In his post, Steve Eichert talks about whether objects used in SOA may or may not contain behavior. I’m just reproducing the comment I was nearly going to make on his post:
It seems to me that this debate is absolutely wrong in the first place. You don't pass OBJECTS around in a SOA architecture, so questioning whether behavior must or must not be included is absolutely faulty. As a matter of fact, because objects are used on the inside boundary, you can use them or not, with behavior or not, and you can even use batch scripts to execute something on your message. That’s right, nothing prevents that.
If you do use objects on the back end to "map" your messages, then certainly you can include whatever you want in them. This is an implementation detail on the inside frontier of your SOA, it is not a valid architecture question.
But this doesn’t really answer any question. The fact is, are we tightly coupled inside the service? Yes, we use types, version binding, in a .net environment. Whatever we do, the inside boundary of the service is extremely tightly coupled compared to the outside. But as always, doesn’t mean you don’t have to be layered and as loosely coupled as possible in the inside.