RE: [egov] EPR and e-Folders

["Ann Wrightson" <Ann.Wrightson@csw.co.uk>]

Tor (& David),

I hate to dampen your enthusiasm, but maybe we *don't* need a standard for e-folders (well, not for ten years or so maybe)? 

<rant>
Simple standards for practical interoperability (eg passing information about road works from local highways dept to local fire service) provide real support for real people doing real jobs in the public service, & I think this TC should encourage and facilitate their development. Open standards for common artefacts such as OpenOffice and UBL are also a Good Thing, and we should support & influence from the Govt angle as appropriate.

But, however attractive the prospect, IMO widespread adoption of in-depth business integration in public administration is well in the future, and has as a prerequisite the widespread adoption and understanding of simple interoperability as above. Also, it is much more important to get simple interoperability widely understood and implemented on the ground, than to invent universal methods for doing it in any context (that only a few experts fully understand).

Overall, there is at this time IMO much much less need for new standards and methodologies than there is will to create them. Conversely, there is much more need for hard graft on the ground to get the really basic stuff delivering benefits. 
(I would make the same comment with respect to, for example, BCM, ebsoa, further elaboration of the SQL family, etc etc.)

In brief:

"K.I.S.S." is the *only* strategy that has any chance of success. 
It is not sexy. It is hard graft. It looks boring. It's the only way. 
(In fact, it's not boring, and it can be just as good for generating conference papers &c ;-)

</rant>

Happy New Year...

Ann W.

PS (If you really want some more... :)

A couple of practical considerations in keeping it simple:
1. Even ebXML core components are complexity-overkill and learning-curve overkill for many of the most urgently needed standards, from what I see of the public sector and corporate (non-IT company) efforts. This is because standards are usually no use for real interoperability unless they have been developed with good input from user-side practitioners, and there is no chance that everyone will have the time to get to grips with complex methods. If the subject-matter experts "tune out" or feel inferior, the standard is unlikely to be good for its intended purpose.
Even namespace prefixes should be "considered harmful" for early adopters of interoperability standards; however this is not usually a handicap, since (very) simple XML with sensibly named tags is often quite sufficient. (See HR-XML for some good practice in this regard, in encouraging conformance and reuse in simple as well as sophisticated ways.) 
More sophisticated structures are implied by wider-scale interoperability, but there's a lot of simple stuff to get going on the ground first before that's a real issue. (There are just a few areas where the wider interoperability is already coming in, eg healthcare.) 

2. Individuals and organizations providing standards-based solutions already have a significant problem regarding the scale and complexity of the skill-set and knowledge base that is required. At the same time, there appear to be an increasing number of people working hard to dig this hole deeper - and worse, believing that it's a good thing! 


Principal Consultant
CSW Group Ltd
***********************************************
Registered Office and Contact Address:
4240 Nash Court
Oxford Business Park South
Oxford
OX4 2RU
Tel: +44/0 1865 337400  Fax: +44/0 1865 337433
Web: <http://www.csw.co.uk>

Registered in England No. 4198197
 
Legal Disclaimer: <http://www.csw.co.uk/disclaimer.htm>
*********************************************** 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Tor Haug [mailto:tor.haug@c2i.net] 
Sent: 15 December 2004 11:46
To: egov@lists.oasis-open.org; peter@justbrown.net
Cc: board@eprforum.org
Subject: [egov] EPR and e-Folders

OASIS e-Government TC - new standard for e-Folder

 

David RR Webber, asked me to inform you about the standardization work we are doing in the field of e-Folders and EPR: 

 

I think it is a great idea for you to do some draft e-Folders ideas and post them - you will get great feedback - and strong attention for EPR.and e-Folders 

Just remember though keep it really really really simple - peel the onion one layer at a time.

 Less is more.  They will appreciate you sending just an outline first.  Then updating that as it develops.

 Also - big advantage of smaller peices - is eventually they will read it - after you have posted the tenth posting with

new updates...

 

I am not sure my message is simple enough - lets I am what's happen. I am observer in the eGov TC. If this will be of interest for the TC I will join as a full member: 

 

Please read the attached document before you read this comments: 

 

The e-Folder standard includes much more than some single metaphors. 

 

A standard for construction of e-Folders does not exist. Why not? The only reason is that nobody has thought of the possibilities before. I myself have worked with standardizing of the elements in electronic processes (EPR). The brother and sister of EPR is e-Folders. EPR demands standardization of the structure and functionality in e-Folders. The EPR standard includes exactly the same as the standard for the e-Folders. 

 

I am quite sure that standardizing of e-Folders is necessary in order to achieve organizational interoperability. The structure of a folder must be the same for all organizations involved. The functions in the folder must also be the same. E.g. the folder must include workflow, the functions in work flow must be the same and not differ from one to another. 

 

If I am right the e-Folder standard must interest both standard organizations and all organizations working with eGov. e-Folders seems to be a common way of presentation information and helping tools in many applications.  

 

In the enclosed invitation there are some simple examples underlying the needs of standardization. 

 

Some days ago I had 3 interesting calls: 

 

-             One was with Trond-Arne Undheim in Brussels. He works for R&D within eGov in EU. I tried to convince him of how necessary it is to standardize structure and functionalities in e-Folders. I believe he accepted that. We also discussed standardizing on functions. I gave him one example - functions in workflow. This area represents chaos, a lot of proprietary solutions and difficulty of getting acceptance for standards. I believe:  

-             If we isolate the functions the functions in itself - it will not be difficult to achieve agreement on functions to be standardized

-             If OASIS eGov TC can delivered this functions as freeware - we can hope that eGov in European countries decided to follow the standard. 

This is just one example - there are many others

 

-             The next two calls had to do with e-Folders. Erik Lillevold works for an EU project with the aim of following the development and the process of establish a new law. Håvard Hegna at Norsk Regnesentral told me about another EU project - to make it easier for citizens to move from one country to another. Both projects would have advantages of standardized folders with freeware. 

 

Let's say that an e-Folder Workshop based on the software components exist. It would be much easier to carry through both projects using the Workshop as a development arena.  

 

I wonder: How many projects do EU have which could take advantages on an e-Folder Workshop? I believe that number is large. It would be an excellent R&D project to find out the potential. We will gladly help the R&D group in the Commission to carry through this project. And it will not take long time - and cost much money. 

 

I hope to get acceptance both in Brussels and among OASIS eGOV TC for the need of an e-Folder standard.  

 

The main problem is financing the work. Without money we can either travel or establish and work through alliances. 

 

The basic standards will also be the basis for establishing sector standards with workshop for the sector. E.g.: e-Construction, e-Healthcare, e-Community  

 

Tor Haug  +47 9005 0506