OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebsoa message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [ebsoa] SOA and Shared Semantics


Ron,

Thanks for the information below on the DLA EII workshop. I noted that
the links below are no longer resolveable, and a Google search did not
yield any results. Would you happen to know where else we might find
this information?

Thanks,
Joe

"Schuldt, Ron L" wrote:
> 
> ebSOA Team,
> 
> On Monday and Tuesday of this week, I participated in an "invitation
> only" Enterprise Information Integration (EII) workshop that was
> sponsored by the Defense Logistics Agency. The focus of the EII workshop
> was semantics integration solutions to solve a case study (but real
> world problem) involving legacy systems. Approximately 55-60 "thought
> leaders" were invited to the workshop. The attendees represented the
> following -- DoD, the military services, other government agencies,
> prime contractors (Lockheed Martin and Boeing), IT vendors (IBM,
> Microsoft, Unicorn, MetaMatrix, Contivo, Network Inference, and others),
> standards bodies (X12, IEEE, ebXML and W3C) and recognized experts on
> the topics of OWL, RDF, Topic Maps, UDEF, and other semantics
> integration concepts and technologies.
> 
> In addition to an outstanding keynote presentation by Jeff Pollock on
> the subject of semantics integration, the outbriefs by the three teams
> warrant your review - see http://www.meiim.com/eii_events.htm
> 
> Following several presentations on Monday morning, the attendees were
> divided into three teams and each was asked to solve the same case
> study. Although the case study was fictitious, it illustrated a real
> world condition involving legacy systems. You can gain some insight to
> the problem by looking at http://www.meiim.com/enter_EII.htm
> 
> All three workgroups were assigned the same case study titled "DoD
> Widget Procurement System (WPS)." Within a four hour time span, each
> team was expected to develop an overview of the proposed plan and
> approach; develop an AS-IS characterization of the existing WPS
> environment; develop a TO-BE systems architecture; discuss how the group
> plans to overcome some of the obstacles cited in the case study; and
> project downstream cost savings and cost avoidance opportunities.
> 
> The outbriefs by each team contained some common key elements within the
> TO-BE architecture - specifically the need for a "loosely coupled"
> metamodel (based on an ontology) and the use of OWL and RDF. Each team
> briefed the DLA customer who was very pleased with the product developed
> by each team. For reference, I was part of team #2.
> 
> IMHO the outbriefs by the three teams plus the presentation by Jeff
> Pollock provide a solid starting point for any discussions regarding
> "shared semantics" by this list.
> 
> Ron Schuldt
> Senior Staff Systems Architect
> Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems
> 11757 W. Ken Caryl Ave.
> #F521 Mail Point DC5694
> Littleton, CO 80127
> 303-977-1414
> ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 5:33 PM
> To: ebSOA
> Subject: Re: [ebsoa] SOA and Shared Semantics
> 
> David,
> 
> Thank you for giving me a useless answer that does not even come close
> to addressing my question below, not once but twice. I obviously do not
> even remotely get your point.
> 
> Frankly, I am looking for answers that I can convey to my US federal
> clients, not (with all due respect to the efforts) some set of acronyms
> that they are not even going to have heard of, because the efforts are
> either too bleeding-edge for me to offer, or they have not been widely
> enough embraced by the federal community and/or vendors to make them
> appealing.
> 
> If we cannot get straight answers to simple, straightforward questions
> like the ones that I posed below, I believe that the chances of this TC
> being successful are - at this point - 2% at best. I hope we can
> increase that soon.
> 
> Thanks,
> Joe
> 
> David RR Webber wrote:
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> > That's my whole point.
> >
> > The BCM/EPR work does provide a very broad
> > set of usage scenarios.
> >
> > I believe we need to build from a solid foundation.
> >
> > If we just run after isolated aspects - we will
> > lose the opportunity to provide a coherent
> > solution set.
> >
> > That is why I'm focusing on areas that provide
> > such coherence to provide a sensible set of
> > base requirements.
> >
> > DW.
> >
> > Quoting Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>:
> >
> > > Thanks David.
> > >
> > > How about in more general terms, stepping aside for a moment from
> > > specific emerging initiatives - I'm thinking more generally, such
> as:
> > > what role should ontologies play? Why are they important in this
> > > context? How about metadata registries? etc.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Joe
> > >
> > > David RR Webber wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Joe,
> > > >
> > > > At this juncture I would like to point out
> > > > that the BCM/EPR team is preparing a set of
> > > > requirements for submission to ebSOA.
> > > >
> > > > This stems from the work and meetings in
> > > > Norway over the past two weeks.
> > > >
> > > > And indeed semantic information is a
> > > > significant part of this - not only
> > > > for common understanding - but also
> > > > when used to create ontologies and
> > > > topic maps for discovery and reuse
> > > > of components.
> > > >
> > > > The essence of the BCM/EPR needs can
> > > > be distilled in part from the PPT
> > > > presented in Norway - available
> > > > from http://www.eprforum.org
> > > >
> > > > However - we are working on formalizing
> > > > the exact mechanisms and base requirements
> > > > so that an ebSOA based set of components
> > > > can support an BCM/EPR deployment.
> > > >
> > > > It's obviously good to be able to focus
> > > > on a real deployment model - to be able
> > > > to hone exact requirements, and
> > > > combination of requirements - rather than
> > > > things being noted in a piecemeal fashion.
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, DW
> > > >
> > > > Quoting Chiusano Joseph <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Is this a topic that we're planning on including in our spec? (I
> think
> > > > > we should) We can emphasize the role of ontologies in helping
> ensure
> > > > > "shared semantic understanding" between participants in an SOA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Joe
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > Joseph Chiusano
> > > > > Associate
> > > > > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://drrw.net
> > >
> > > --
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Joseph Chiusano
> > > Associate
> > > Booz | Allen | Hamilton
> > >
> >
> > http://drrw.net
> 
> --
> Kind Regards,
> Joseph Chiusano
> Associate
> Booz | Allen | Hamilton

-- 
Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Associate
Booz | Allen | Hamilton


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]