[no subject]

DW.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: "Ockert Cameron" <ockertc@tshimollo.net>; "'Farrukh Najmi'"
<Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>; "'Rex Brooks'" <rexb@starbourne.com>
Cc: "'Tim Benson'" <tim.benson@abies.co.uk>; "'OASIS eGov list'"
<egov@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: [egov] Proposed Use Case template


> Thanks, Ockert,
>
> This is good news, even if Windows-specific in terms of OS on which
> the toolset works, which is okay for me personally since it supports
> Java and C++ which can then be worked on other platforms.
>
> However, the question at issue isn't the cost of the toolset or even
> a choice between one or another modeling language per se, although I
> personally prefer UML. The question is one of grounding the
> derivation of the use-cases. The simplified model of ontological
> participants Farrukh suggests is very high level and assumes a Domain
> Expert, Content Publisher and a Registry Group and that's fine at a
> high level. I'm suggesting developing lower level scenarios more
> appropriate to the domains for which Farrukh's model assumes a Domain
> Expert.
>
> I think we might want to put our initial focus there, gathering
> exemplar scenarios that uses the template I offered which has already
> seen some successful use in the WSRP TC for laying out roles,
> functions and responsibilities before a modeling tool or model is
> applied to formally analyze, operate, prepare comparative reports and
> distribute reports in preparation for policy-making decisions or
> other management actions. I think it might be wise to prepare such
> materials in order to define requirements for what is needed to
> perform functions such as gathering specific data inputs, classifying
> and sorting inputs, filling in forms, performing transforms,
> allocating IT resources, compiling statistical knowledge
> representations of transformed data, preparing decision-making
> models, etc.
>
> In other words, it is actually a workflow decision on whether to
> assume we know enough a priori to move immediately to a use-case
> model or whether evaluating a population of scenarios grounded in
> actual experience beforehand makes sense. The one reason I can think
> of that favors evaluating scenarios first is that there may be more
> than one or even a few use-case models that would serve better in
> different situations, such as the differences between environmental
> impact reports and developing building codes for different
> microclimates and/or geological factors, or evaluating the effects of
> trade policies long and short term, etc. I suspect that we probably
> will find that we need to narrow down what constitutes a Domain
> Expert for different domain sets.
>
> Ciao,
> Rex
>
> At 7:06 AM +0200 2/11/04, Ockert Cameron wrote:
> >We use a modeling tool called EA from http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/ -
it
> >is very powerfull, and can run standalone or using a central RDBMS such
as
> >MySQL. In terms of international recognized tool sets such as Rose, EA is
> >around 28 times cheaper, and have almost comparable functionality. Would
the
> >use of such a tool not potentially solve the problem?
> >
> >Regards
> >Ockert Cameron
> >Solutions Architect
> >Dept of Justice and Constitutional Development
> >South Africa
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM]
> >Sent: 10 February 2004 10:44 PM
> >To: Rex Brooks
> >Cc: Tim Benson; OASIS eGov list
> >Subject: Re: [egov] Proposed Use Case template
> >
> >Rex Brooks wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>  If what is being proposed fits the actual scenarios, then we will know
> >>  that we are grounded. Being grounded is more important, it seems to
> >>  me, than creating structures at this point, although I am sure that a
> >>  great deal of experience with "systems" has gone into this model, and
> >>  it may well be accurate and useful, but I can't tell that in the
abstract.
> >
> >I agree that being grounded is more important. I was assuming (maybe
> >incorrectly) that structure helps achive grounding. I certainly do not
want
> >to be overly prescriptive to the point were structure (the means) becomes
a
> >barrier to achieving grounding (the end).
> >
> >>
> >>  Please take no offense, Farrukh, I hope it proves out that your model
> >>  is well drawn and fits many more instances than those I cite, but I
> >  > have no background that enables me to reckon that.
> >
> >Absolutely none taken. You raise a valid concern that we could get bogged
> >down by form rather than focus on substance.
> >
> >My suggetsion came from having observed in many situation discussion that
> >sometime tend to meander without any governing structure. Use cases are
an
> >important methodology for addressing that. I went a step further to
suggest
> >a form for managing use cases.
> >In the Semantic Content Management SC we are trying on the side of more
> >formal structure with hyperlinks between use cases etc.
> >Lets see how this works out.
> >
> >We have a wealth of experience here in the egov TC. What may help is to
hear
> >what people's experience has been in managing use cases effectively.
> >Thanks.
> >
> >--
> >Regards,
> >Farrukh
> >
> >
> >
> >To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the
> >OASIS TC), go to
>
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.p
h
> >p.
>
>
> -- 
> Rex Brooks
> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA, 94702 USA, Earth
> W3Address: http://www.starbourne.com
> Email: rexb@starbourne.com
> Tel: 510-849-2309
> Fax: By Request
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/egov/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>