John, Chris,
I agree with the approach being outlined.
From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of John Borras
Sent: Friday, 9 May, 2014 06:25
To: TGF TC List; colin_wallis@hotmail.com
Subject: Fw: [tgf] NEW TGF PATTERN?
Picking up on Chris' point 4 below, what do people think about the idea of producing a new pattern along the lines of
"aiming to map out at a high level the technology architecture which best supports the sort of open and citizen-centric approach recommended
in TGF. This would take some of the principles already enunciated in Pattern T2 (Technology Development and Management) and show what these look like in terms of a high level architectural model based on open standards"
And if we go down this route are there any existing models that members know of or would like to contribute rather than us starting
with a blank sheet of paper?
Thoughts please so we can have a focussed discussion on the next call rather than an open-ended brainstorm.
John
With apologies for the delay, here are some thoughts on the IoT issue, and your suggestion of a new pattern.
My thoughts run something like this:
1) TGF doesn't feel like the place to address any standards development needs that IoT may throw up at the technical level
2) At a business and organisational change level, I'm not convinced that IoT throws up new issues that aren't dealt with in TGF already. Yes, it is another important and disruptive wave of technology change, but all of the challenges the public sector faces
in getting benefit from it feel like the familiar silo and cultural issues TGF is already aimed at addressing.
3) So there may be a case for weaving more reference to IoT into the TGF narrative, but it doesn't feel to me like a pattern in its own right.
4) That said, I think there is real potential in your idea of a 'Platform Management' pattern of some sort. I would see this as being more part of the Technology Management section of the TGF, aiming to map out at a high level the technology architecture which
best supports the sort of open and citizen-centric approach recommended in TGF. This would take some of the principles already enunciated in Pattern T2 (Technology Development and Management) and show what these look like in terms of a high level architectural
model based on open standards. A number of TC participants like Microsoft and Oracle already have such models they use with government clients, and there is a good degree of commonality. So I could see value in looking to develop some sort of consensus model
in this space, which covered but was not solely focused on IoT.
Look forward to discussing further on the call.
Chris Parker
Managing Partner, CS Transform
+44 7951 754060
________________________________________
From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of John Borras [johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: 02 May 2014 10:57
To: TGF TC List
Subject: [tgf] NEW TGF PATTERN?
I've had 2 separate but related email discussions going on over the last couple of weeks.
First my email to the list concerning the Internet of Things to which Nig has so far responded, see attached. And second a discussion with Hans concerning the Man to Machine interface and Scenario Planning, see attached.
It seems to me that these two aspects are closely related and perhaps point to a new Service Management pattern in the TGF. It could be another dimension of Channel Management but I feel there is a difference between Channels and Platforms and therefore we
could be talking about a new Platform Management pattern. I'm not sure what the new pattern would say other than raising awareness of this aspect and pointing to the new work in ISO and IEEE that Coin pointed us to on the last call. It's also interesting
the OASIS has just issued a new information note on the IoT and M2M although it doesn't suggest that any new work is about to start in the organisation but it is clearly an emerging topic.
I'll put this on the agenda for our next TC call but it would be good to get some views in advance of that please. Is there something for us to consider and develop a new pattern or not?
John
|