Hi All,
I think that we could regret it if we ‘pull up stumps’. The time for the value of things to be recognised can be quite protracted and I think that the absence of this TC to support use of TGF artefacts and to move the work
forward as developments occur would leave a gap that will widen over time.
There is a feeling of a lull in Government IT in the UK at the moment as we are awaiting the outcome of a spending review but items that have been (and still appear to be in some form) on the agenda such as Government as a Platform
(GaaP) are areas where we could apply our collective experience and possibly provide guidance in the future (it is reported that several other governments are watching the UK). GaaP has yet to be formally defined but appears to have some legs as there is a
statement that local government is to be involved in some aspects of it. I did produce a paper on some considerations for getting it to work that I attach here FYI.
The UK is considering data registers and I have already mentioned the BSI work on a PAS for Smart City Data. These are all aspects on which I believe we could have a collective view and determine the value that the TC could add.
There was also the ISO/JTC1 alignment work and I’m not quite sure what happened to that. We have also mentioned the possibility of wider use of the patterns concept within OASIS.
So I think that there are a number of items that it would be worth us discussing as a group and it would be a shame for it to disappear. The effort in setting up a new future group would mean that it would most likely be unable to
gather momentum from a standing start and respond to stimuli in a timely manner. The fact that some people have enquired about meetings indicates that they see value in the TC.
Perhaps, rather than winding the group up, we could schedule some less frequent meetings to compare notes and see what we could and would want to deliver – perhaps every 3-4 months - until we identify some specific deliverables to
produce.
WRT to a chair, I would be prepared to take on the role but would need some support (from OASIS Admin?) in ensuring that I follow the appropriate protocols.
Regards
Nig
Nig Greenaway
Fujitsu Fellow
FUJITSU
Lovelace Road, Bracknell, Berkshire, RG12 8SN
Tel: +44 (0) 843 354 5637 Internal: 7444 5637
Mob : +44 (0) 7867 833147 Internal: 7383 3147
From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Colin Wallis
Sent: 18 October 2015 22:29
To: 'Peter F Brown' <peter@peterfbrown.com>; TGF TC List <tgf@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [tgf] RE: Request for new items
Thanks Peter
I’ve dropped off the OASIS staffers for a moment, for this response.
It is interesting isn’t it, that everywhere we look there is ‘Business Transformation’ (add your adjective.. Digital, Government, whatever.. but so few of these initiatives feel the need to follow any specification.
I know in my own Government agency I circulate the links to the TGF every 6 months or so in response to some question/query/conundrum.. and I get back the same ‘oh yes, very good’.. but no motivation to
change what they are doing to fit with the TGF approach. Not that I can determine, at any rate..
This follows on from an earlier regime’s ‘TGF-Lite’ approach, where in 2012-13 they at least looked at it in depth. With those folks moved on and another crop of well meaning folks re-learning the whole
thing again.
Is it that public sector institutions are so bound up in being their own special snowflakes? Is it that the TGF is not compelling in some way? I don’t know for sure but I would like to hear views from others.
Cheers
Colin
Hi all,
It has been a very busy few months for all of us, in our different areas of work and interest. In that time, the future of the TGF TC has probably not been in the forefront of our thoughts, workplans or considerations –
but it has always been there, somewhere, in the background!
I have received a couple of emails over the last period asking about when a next meeting of the TC would take place – but I can’t really answer that without any specific items to discuss – hence my reluctance to set a date
and an agenda.
As you are all aware, the only open item regards the possible progression of the current TGF v2 committee specification to the status of OASIS Standard – but that has still not received the minimum number of statements
of use, required to take the next step. And even then, we should not under-estimate the work involved in getting a candidate standard through the member ballot, handling any comments or negative votes received and getting us over the finishing line.
As such, unless I receive, before the end of the month, a specific, tractable, proposal for further work AND a volunteer to step up as Chair of the TC, I would like to suggest that we “declare victory” with the
great number of deliverables that we have achieved to date, celebrate this fact and ask the OASIS TC Administration to do the necessary to close our TC.
With best regards to one and all,
Peter
Interim Chair, TGF TC
 |
Peter F Brown
Independent Consultant
Certified Privacy professional (CIPT)
Member, Institute of Directors
|
”Using Information Technologies to Empower and Transform”
|
