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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tgf message

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

Subject: RE: [tgf] Note on Methodology; Terminology

Indeed, a great start.

And Annex A in Beyond Interoperability is useful in a practical way too.

However, I want to flag that in formal standardisation circles, definitions that are a paragraph long are not acceptable.

And remember we want to give the ISOs of this world as little room to 'play' in future formalisations of this standard.

The first rule of thumb is that if you replace the term you are trying to define, with the actual definition, you still have to make a grammatically correct sentence.

The second rule of thumb is try to use Oxford English dictionary terms where possible so you minimise the need to define a commonly understood term in a different way.


ISO-type definitions typically achieve this by having definitions that are a phrase, then using 'Notes' to explain the term in a practical way.


I think this is what Peter hints at in his sub section on Terminology in his Methodology paper.  Read his 5 steps again.


So, in summary, nothing wrong in the Annex A, and it will be useful in the Notes to a definition. But those paragraphs as written may not *be* the definition.





From: Chris Parker [mailto:chris.parker@cstransform.com]
Sent: Friday, 7 January 2011 9:51 p.m.
To: peter@peterfbrown.com; tgf@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [tgf] Note on Methodology; Terminology




Thanks for a great start - this all looks sound to me.


You might also want to look at the annex to our attached white paper on "Beyond Interoperability".  This defined all the terms in our map of Policy Products (ie the matrix mapping the EIF interop domains against the four governance areas of our model) which seemed to us not already to be in common use in other frameworks.  One of the things this does is unpack what we believe are the three key components of "legal interoperability" - legal vires for inter-agency working; a legal basis for public private partnership; and a pro-competitive regulatory regime for the ICT sector - with each of these then further defined.   I'm not aware of the EU or anyone else having defined legal interoperability in any practical way, so this may be a useful way of filling at least that gap in your gloassary. 


Chris Parker

Managing Partner, CS Transform Ltd, +44 7951 754 060



From: Peter F Brown [mailto:peter@peterfbrown.com]
Sent: 06 January 2011 22:05
To: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [tgf] Note on Methodology; Terminology


A Happy New Year to everyone.


I have updated to the OASIS work area a first cut of the proposed core terminology, as promised. It’s little more than a capture of terms at this stage, without many definitions. See:



I have also started work on a note on methodology – the section covering the development of the terminology is finished and is attached for information. The next steps will be to examine the list of other possible deliverables based on the contributions and discussions so far and look at the methodology issues that will need to be addressed.





Peter F Brown

Independent Consultant

Description: Description: cid:image002.png@01CB9639.DBFD6470

Transforming our Relationships with Information Technologies



P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA

Tel: +1.310.694.2278

Until 9 Jan 2011, Tel : +32.472.027.811


CAUTION:  This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. Thank you.

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