> The S was meant to be service as in windows service but it was co-opted to be service as in web service.
That assertion makes no sense as SOA is a software architecture approach and the communication between services has no impact on the system's architecture.
Communication between services has a huge impact on system architecture. A web service is an RPC mechanism, whether it's SOAP, REST, CORBA or whatever, it's nothing new and didn't need a new name. SOA was supposed to be message driven, usually through an ESB or something similar, MSMQ was popular at the time.
That assertion makes no sense as SOA is a software architecture approach and the communication between services has no impact on the system's architecture.