[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tgf] Fw: OASIS TGF TC - 16th OCTOBER MEETING PAPERS
|
As discussed in this meeting (and I apologize for not responding earlier) I think this paragraph in the “Unpredictable Futures” section:
The sheer amount of data that services will generate introduces further risk factors such as the difficultly in turning it into actionable information. The volume will exceed the capability of humans to act
appropriately upon it and lead to many decisions being taken automatically. This introduces the potential for some key factors to be missed leading to outcomes that are suboptimal or completely wrong.
Requires the following sentence (or similar): “Furthermore, the responsibility for these decisions will likely remain with the governing body and therefore such automatic decisions may require some authority or scope boundary.” I guess the point is that, even though your IoT system thinks something is a good idea, you probably want to limit the scope of the automatic decisions that can be made. For example, altering traffic timings might be ok, but automatically
reducing the water levels in dams might require human intervention. Overall I think the document is really useful in highlighting the major policy challenges introduced by the IoT – and in pointing to the application of appropriate patterns in the TGF.
thanks Geoff Clarke
Regional Standards Manager | Microsoft | +61 410 533 096 | skype: geoffnclarke From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Chris Parker Dear all I attach a version of Nig’s paper with some suggested changes marked up in revisions mode. Basically, I have done two things: ·
Topped and tailed Nig’s text, with a short intro section (to explain why you might want to read the document
and how it is structured) and a conclusion (prompted by Colin’s suggestions). ·
Expanded the cross-references in the tables so they give the whole pattern name, not just its number (so that
the reader does not need to keep referring back to the diagram to see what we’re talking about). I had also planned to draft a sentence or so on each pattern to go in the ‘notes’ section of the table, explaining briefly
why it was relevant to the IoT characteristic being discussed. But in the end I have abandoned the attempt – because my explanations were either so short that they added little to that which is implicit in the pattern title, or were starting to get so long
that the combined effect was excessive. Maybe others could come up with pithier one-liners for each pattern than I’ve managed to. If not, my thinking is that we should simply delete the ‘notes’ columns from the tables. I think that Nig’s intro text above
each table, coupled with the expanded cross-references to named patterns, is enough to show why the TGF is relevant without duplicating the TGF. Looking forward to the call on Thursday. Regards, Chris Parker Managing Partner CS Transform Limited T: +44 7951 754060 F: +44 207 681 3908 Citizen Service Transformation From:
tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of John Borras Attached are the papers and call details for our TC call on Thursday.
Any further thoughts on Nig's latest paper would be appreciated before the meeting. Peter is hoping to have a draft paper for consideration
under Item 4. A note of any absences would be welcomed in advance. Finally just a reminder that this call is at
07.30 UK / 08.30 CEST / 02.30 EST / 23.30 PST (15th) / 19.30 NZ / 16.30 AUS. John |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]