[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Another diagram
Thanks Ken, The little light bulb just lit up. You're quite correct about Evidence of Trust. I was thinking of that as Evidence FOR Trust. My bad. I think we need Evidence for Trust, too. Different kettle of fish. I was just citing the definition of Evidence of Trust, not advocating it. I accepted the definition, but I'm not so enamored of it that I would advocate against a change or an addition. I'm also ambivalent about Written Expression but less ambivalent about Promise. I think making Promise explicit is probably wise. What I'm still missing is the specific kind of context which Trust needs. I assumed that the Service Description and the process leading up to the point at which Willingness is established between or among participants sets the preparation context (if that makes sense--and I am not necessarily suggesting that we create a new element named preparation context but that might be needed. I thought that preparation context was subsumed in the establishment of Willingness, and was, therefore, unnecessary in the same sense that the Willingness Threshold was unnecessary. If that is not the case, and we need an explicit context for Trust, I would just like to know what the specific context you have in mind is. I had also assumed that establishing Willingness would signal a change in context (or shared state) from preparation context to execution context? Just trying to understand, Rex At 8:07 PM -0400 5/13/09, Ken Laskey wrote: >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" >>><<><mailto:klaskey@mitre.org>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><http://technoracle.blogspot.com>http://technoracle.blogspot.com >>> >>>Twitter: duanechaos >>> >>>TV Show: >>><<http://www.duanesworldtv.org>http://www.duanesworldtv.org><http://www.duanesworldtv.org>http://www.duanesworldtv.org >>> >>>Band: >>><<http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury>http://www.myspace.com/22ndcentury><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 -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-898-0670
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]