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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm-ra message

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


Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Another diagram


I strongly believe we have to close the loop using RM concepts.  

We define assertion as

An assertion is a proposition that is held to be true by a stakeholder.

This is insufficient for trust because what I assert is irrelevant, what I can measure is everything.  I can measure shared state.

I had never seen section 3.2.2.1 before -- probably a meeting I missed -- but why in a SOA RA document are we defining Written Expression?  Why do I care about Promise?  Where are the RM concepts?

As for Evidence of Trust, there is Evidence and I may use it in my assessment of Trust.  Evidence of Trust is the shared state that shows I went ahead with an interaction and so I must have had sufficient Trust.  However, in the concert with additional Evidence, it may just be evidence of sloppy decision making or insanity.

Ken

On May 13, 2009, at 7:20 PM, Rex Brooks wrote:

We already defined Evidence of Trust as the set of observable
assertions.... I pushed hard for the dependencies so that Dave and I
can build evidence of trust into policy-based decisions in solution
architectures based on the RAF. How much more than reputation,
trustor's experience with trustee, third-party ratings/opinions and
the formal exchange of tokens do we need?

Dave would like to get intent specifically included in Trust
included, but I am not up to more infinite decomposition and debate,
since we can use the prior definition and discussion of intent,
goals, adoption of goals and accountability.

As to context, have we failed to define and discuss and explain our
uses of that? Heck, it's Section 1.1. It also shows up in Section 3.1
in the airline example and then it is specifically noted as part of
the cpmtext of acting in a social context as joint action.

Cheers,
Rex

At 2:31 PM -0700 5/13/09, Duane Nickull wrote:
I agree with Ken (especially the part about not trusting Bettina to
pick out a good action movie).  I think that "evidence" is really
"beliefs" or similar.  Many people see evidence to the contrary but
still believe their original notions.  For example, your see
evidence that contradicts your deep rooted beliefs.  Most people
still like to cling to their belief system.

D


On 5/13/09 2:00 PM, "Ken Laskey" <<>klaskey@mitre.org> wrote:

I do not trust her to go to the video
store and pick out a good action adventure movie.


--
Sr. Technical Evangelist - Adobe Systems
Chair - OASIS SOA RM Technical Committee
Manager - Adobe LiveCycle ES Developers List
Blog: <http://technoracle.blogspot.com>http://technoracle.blogspot.com
Twitter: duanechaos
TV Show: <http://www.duanesworldtv.org>http://www.duanesworldtv.org
Band: <http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury>http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury


--
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305      phone: 703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive                         fax:       703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508







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