RE: [pmrm] OASIS PMRM TC: next steps

["Michael Willett" <mwillett@nc.rr.com>]

Peter –

 

For practice, I prefer ‘archetype’ PMAs first, then real life.

 

The reason: We learned from our experience with the Emergency Responder

use case that:

 

   - so much was missing from the (seemingly) detailed descriptions; that we had to provide (invent?)

 

  - the PMRM Methodology (moving to the actual operational implementation) reveals

    intrinsic “holes” in the use case

 

These are excellent learning experiences, but require the participation of subject matter experts (which we have!).

We wind up in the business of correcting/completing the use case. Certainly, this ability to do

use case introspection is a valuable by-product of applying the PMRM Methodology,

which helps to better define the use case. But, as you indicate, not easy, but more powerful.    

 

For the ‘archetypal’ use case, we can contrive to make the use case description and

ingredients complete and focus on applying the PMRM Methodology.

 

But, let’s see what PMRM TC members want to work on themselves, possibly in small ‘sub-committees’.

 

Michael        

 

From: pmrm@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:pmrm@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Peter F Brown
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 9:18 AM
To: Michael Willett; pmrm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [pmrm] OASIS PMRM TC: next steps

 

Michael,

I think you articulate very well what one of the key next phases needs to be.

My main question is whether we produce “archetype” PMSa for several areas, or examples from real-life situations, working with the stakeholders to come up with something together. The first is (possibly) easier); the second (probably), more powerful…

 

Peter

 

From: pmrm@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:pmrm@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Michael Willett
Sent: 11 March 2012 17:37
To: pmrm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [pmrm] OASIS PMRM TC: next steps

 

Even as we are on the verge of publishing a Committee Draft

of our PMRM deliverable, we need to think ahead to Next Steps.

 

What the PMRM promises emphatically is that the methodology

can be applied to arbitrary privacy Use Cases and produce

a Privacy Management Analysis (PMA) to varying levels of detail.

 

So, one direction of immediate pursuit needs to be to

tackle several Use Cases (in parallel; by informal ‘sub-committees’?),

proceeding through the Task-oriented Methodology

and producing PMAs to at least a first level of granularity,

to illustrate the PMRM in real Use Cases.

 

In this way, we can produce a ‘library’ of Use Case PMAs,

all in the same format. Each could be re-visited later

for deeper levels of detail, if of interest.   

 

We have partially tackled several Use Cases while developing

the PMRM Methodology. We can go back to those Use Cases

and produce a PMA. Or, subset those Use Cases OR find new ones.

 

At this stage, the purpose would be to illustrate the PMRM Methodology

and not necessarily to exhaustively render the Use Case.

 

I feel a trite slogan coming on! Rome wasn’t built in a ….  

 

Thoughts? (Not on Rome).

 

Michael