Denise
You are probably correct that I am not be aware of what some organizations are doing in this (EA) area and I’d love to hear n=more as relevant to the discussion. I am very much aware of what DoD is doing, based on the DODAF metamodel and also with the FEA DRM just recently taken an additional step and as you mention
“ has first needs to establish its IA (information architecture) across the department, before it can hope to develop a practical working ontology. “
I think that Nicolas’s recent message on some of the issues of relating Barry’s 3 views gets at one sense of the problem and so I expect responses to his questions to be helpful. One chicken and egg problem with groups establishing a standare IA is that the IA formalisms, such as ERDs, just lack the semantics to support adequate modeling of enterprises and thus seem to not provide an adequate “ basis for resolving contextual conflicts. “
So this would be one area that you might point, at least me, in a direction where this has been current “adequately”.
You also mentioned “ The bottom line is that it is possible to resolve these problems, but people want a really quick solution. They're not willing to put
the time and effort into defining the IA, and establishing the context.”
Agreed, and I would add that since this does take time we need an approach that gives us sound models that are incrementally enhaceable, so that early work are not silos and does not preclude improvements and integration with other models.
Best regards,
Gary Berg-Cross
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (01)
|