CDSI WG, (01)
I completed about a dozen email exchanges with Jim Hendler. Below is his
final response. (02)
The attached paper reflects some good points he made. It now lists
"Ontology Mapping and Linking" as a candidate technical solution and recognizes
its promise in solving enterprising-wide data interoperability, but still only
rates it a 4 on the 9-level Technology Readiness Level scale. (This rating is
still open if anyone can give a good example of it being higher or lower.) He
is not embracing or concuring with the paper, but his initial opposition seems
to have been resolved by the suggestions (good ones) I made. (03)
In a day or two, I'll post this again to the SICoP list, and if no other
technical comments, will remove the 'draft' and post it to our web site. I'll
then call a teleconference to discuss how to get the paper out to the right
people. (04)
Jim Schoening (05)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Hendler [mailto:hendler@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 5:03 PM
To: Schoening, James R C-E LCMC CIO/G6
Subject: Re: Moving out with paper (06)
I agree with you that it is important they [DoD] understand, or at least
explore, limitations, but to be honest, what I'd really like to see is DoD move
some of this stuff into acquisition, that's where they actually scale maturing
technologies in practice, not in the research world - the amount of money in
Army research going into data interoperability right now is trivial (and
they're cutting back), DARPA which controls most of the IT research money in
the DoD is not terribly interested in pushing the area, Air Force has some
investment, but not really enough to make things happen. I think the community
needs to tell the DoD that we are ready to play - I think if a company like
SAIC, LM or Northrup-Grumman got a big contract to do database interoperability
with a requirement that they could not replace existing systems, but had to
integrate in place, it would push the field far more than the small research
investment ARL has for this stuff. Heck, the subcontract partneri!
ng in such an acquisition would probably be more money than a research program
in the area (and there'd be a "make it work" aspect) - but I think each of
these things is equally unlikely in the near future - data integration remains
on everyones list of important problems, but everyone seems to be waiting for
commercial industry to solve it - your report will be read by some CIOs as
"keep waiting" - but hopefully some other folks will see there's a point here
and move budgets - it's a long shot, but what the heck, that's what we do...
-JH (07)
Data Interoperability Across the Enterprise 16 Feb-07.doc
Description: MS-Word document
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/cuo-wg/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/cuo-wg/
To Post: mailto:cuo-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/cuo-wg/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/CommonUpperOntologyWG (01)
|