Cory, (01)
We see the wisdom in taking a measured response in defining demonstrations
of near term capabilities from the SOA vendors. (02)
BUT..... the federal government is not making a strong effort here to
create new systems based on something other than what it has been funding in
the past. (?) I understand that there is a comfort level with the IT
systems the government has acquired in the recent past. So I see no problem
here. (03)
The assumption (it seems) is that OMG participants have already gotten the
contracts tied down. Maybe that is ok, maybe that is what the federal
government intends. (04)
To what extend will a no - IT centric viewpoint be made in the RFP? I
cannot see any promise in this direction. (05)
We are considering a submission to the May 23-24 conference (06)
SOA (Service-Oriented Architecture) Community of Practice (CoP) and
Service-Oriented Architectures for E-Government Conference, May 23-24, 2006
See http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SOAforEGovernment_2006_05_2324 (07)
where existing COTS products (from the KM world) can be reviewed in the
context of KM driven SOA requirements in the federal space. (08)
BCNGroup is reviewing this technology in the context of wiki and portals (as
well as mainstream KM as might be applied to SOA deployments). (09)
Our problem is in how the Powers That Be (and I guess we have to point to
you and OMG as being sameAs PTB ) sees what is on the horizon or not. (010)
Does the horizon ever move for the PTB? In twenty years I have seen very
little movement on this horizon. (011)
Let me ask the forum if anyone would like to form a sub-committee, or OASIS
TC, to gather together some representation of the KM practice potential
contribution to a SOA RFP for NARA. An OASIS specification of
KM-orientation for SOA might be useful in 12 to 18 months. (012)
If there is no interest we will drop the discussion at least here. (I am on
travel all of tomorrow) and will see who might be interested on Thursday.
psp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (013)
On April 7th, my group will talk about a submission or one or more papers on
the KM aspects of SOA - specific to NARA as well as to the May 23-24
conference. (014)
NARA and Health care document management do have an intersection - one would
assume. But the deeper semantics (purposes) of NARA and of Health care
governance have many differences. (015)
David, (016)
It is snowing here in Montreal and yes I have an umbrella. (smiles) (017)
You said: (018)
" I much prefer the secure document model enshrined in the IHE/XDS Registry
work in tandem with NIST. (019)
And this is open source work. The focus is healthcare but the model I'm
sure translates to other domains. (020)
The design document is available here:
http://healthcare.xml.org/resources/IHE_ITI_Cross-enterprise_Doc_Sharing_200
4_08-15.pdf" (021)
<end quote> (022)
I understand the several points you are making. (023)
The NARA RFP is not really going to be open source nor even publicly
visible. (024)
It is difficult to know how to feel about this. I would like to see a KM
orientation to SOA implementation methodology in general; and we see the
OASIS BCM specification as being "as close as anyone has been allowed to
come" towards a KM type SOA methodology. (025)
Over the next 30 days we will be talking about a specific contribution to
BCM (business centric methodology) "choice points", "conceptualization
visualization and aggregation" and "social networks"... all which we feel is
highly relevant to not IT centric SOA. (026)
I remember the past distinction made here: (027)
Is SOA about "architecture" or about "service". (028)
Perhaps this is where the world is turned up-side down? (029)
Paul Prueitt (030)
_________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/soa-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/soa/
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Community Wiki: http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AnnouncementofSOACoP (031)
|