[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tgf] Draft deliverable 1 - the TGF Core Framework
Colin: Absolutely – at this stage, I haven’t really been looking at the detailed text, just the overall flow. They are phrases and paras that are “CS Transform specific” – I’m sure Chris would agree with that – and my initial idea has just been to take as much as we can. Next steps will be to take out any such text, check whether there are missing sections/themes and looking for additional input. We have had similar issues with other OASIS specs – the demarcation between the intro and why of the spec, and the actual spec. I’ll keep a keen eye on that Peter From: Colin Wallis [mailto:Colin.Wallis@dia.govt.nz] Great work Peter. My only <100% positive comment is that we will need to watch the demarcation between setting the scene/context and the actual framework. As it stands it flows well, but that point in the text at which you say to yourself…. .. "Ah ha..you've set the scene for me. Now here's the framework"… …is kind of muddy/murky. I think that may mean that some of the things back might come forward into the context part, so you get a more complete sense of the 'problem statement', that the framework then methodically works through to address. Cheers Colin From: Peter F Brown [mailto:peter@peterfbrown.com] Hi: In line with the proposals that I made last week, I have submitted to our document repository a first, very rough and ready draft of what would be the first main standards-track deliverable, the ‘TGF Core Framework’: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tgf/document.php?document_id=40965 I’ve screen scraped from the CS Transform contributions and used various bits that have also been worked on. The detail isn’t important at this stage (and as editors, Chris and I will obviously take care to endure the text is fully coherent), just the overall structure and flow. I’ll do the same for the next three – which should be easier as they are more or less straight lifts from the business management, customer management and channel management sections of the contributions we have. I’ll submit them asap. As for the four ‘non-standards track’ Committee Notes, - we don’t yet have any substantive content for the one on SOA; - the one on “tools and models for the business management framework” will include material we have on the milestones matrix, the stakeholders map, and the policy map - the ones on “tools and models for the customer management framework” and “tools and models for the channel management framework” are fairly bare at the moment – we will have to judge how much goes in the respective ‘frameworks’ and how much needs to be left to a non-standards track paper Regards, Peter Peter F Brown Independent Consultant Transforming our Relationships with Information Technologies Blog pensivepeter.wordpress.com LinkedIn www.linkedin.com/in/pensivepeter Twitter @pensivepeter P.O. Box 49719, Los Angeles, CA 90049, USA Tel: +1.310.694.2278 ==== |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]