Re: [egov] Proposed Use Case template

["David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>]

Rex,

Sally is going to remind us of the need for the glossary again!

When we say "business-centric", we do not mean commercial
for profit view point persay!

Notice the Canadian government now operates significant
chunks of itself as partial self-funding cost and value centers.

So we are using business in a generic-sense - and whether
you are measuring value in terms of $$$, or in terms of
intangible value metrics - you still need to guage all that
before seeking technology to address those needs!

The main point being that technology by itself is not
the solution - its a 50:50 partnership - and that is what
BCM seeks to establish.

Hope that helps.

DW

p.s. BTW - the new BCM brochure is a great read - see
      the link from the BCM home page.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>; "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 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: [egov] Proposed Use Case template


> Hi David,
>
> I joined BCM as an observer to get a better idea of what you are
> speaking to and because I did not want to engage in a discussion on
> the relative pros and cons of adopting a predominantly "Business"
> viewpoint where governmental functions are required without first
> exposing myself to what is being presented. Since signing up by no
> means provides the background needed, I have some study to do, but
> having observed, and largely applauded, the move to "Enterprise
> Architecture" from several viewpoints over the last couple of years,
> but largely in a standards-oriented viewpoint through my
> participation in OASIS, I think we need to be careful just how
> extensively we adopt that model without due consideration to
> appropriateness to specific governmental functionalities.  One
> doesn't want adoption of the model to mean adoption of all practices.
> I'm just getting my feet wet in this, so I will hold further
> discussion in abeyance until I learn more.
>
> Ciao,
> Rex
>
> At 10:28 AM -0500 2/11/04, David RR Webber wrote:
> >Rex,
> >
> >From the BCM perspective there is the business
> >analysis template that sits above the use case
> >diagrams - and specifies from the business view
> >what the goals, outcomes, behaviours should
> >be.  This then breaks out into one or more (usually
> >more) use case diagrams underneath that showing
> >the technology view.
> >
> >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.p
hp.
> >>
> >>
>
>
> -- 
> 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.
>
>