Thanks for comments and suggestions.
I think it would be great if Jan McConchie joined the next meeting.
Regarding the “JTC 1 alignment work” I would say that there is a study group on what we’re calling the “mapping between ISO/IEC 38500
and OASIS TGF”. That’s not quite the right term, but what we are trying to do is two things:
-
If you’re using 38500, how might see how TGF could apply and help you (assuming you’re in government etc) and vice versa
-
What feedback/suggestions can we give to the editors of SC40 (the group that looks after 38500) or the TGF TC
This work is proceeding slowly, with a report expected in about the April 2016 timeframe. It is likely that the outcome of the report
will be a suggestion to create a Technical Report that answers the two points above. Note that we are not trying to align or harmonize the two standards – they cover different things.
So, yes, there is work going on that is related to OASIS TGF – though not specifically
in the TC.
I still think our biggest challenge is to get that second statement of use to enable TGF V2 to become an OASIS standard.
I agree with Nig on the quarterly call (while we all try to get that missing statement of use).
Longer term, I think it would be great to see how we can “reimagine” the TGF TC (sorry, I had to use that word because it’s a magic
marketing term that is wonderfully overused J).
For example, I suspect we could remove the “G” and apply it more broadly – and incorporate some of the modern data-based things we’re seeing - like IoT, big data, governance, privacy and other burning issues that really are causing businesses to want to transform
or be disrupted. I’m working on a new marketing term that I call “uberizing the business”. (you now know why I’m not in marketing).
Personally, I think there’s a lot of work to do here, so I’d hate to see the TGF TC killed off (unless it rises again as something
new).
Geoff Clarke
Regional Standards Manager | Microsoft | +61 410 533 096 | skype: geoffnclarke
From: tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Chris Parker
Sent: Tuesday, 27 October 2015 3:05 PM
To: Greenaway Nigel <Nig.Greenaway@uk.fujitsu.com>; Colin Wallis <Colin.Wallis@dia.govt.nz>; 'Peter F Brown' <peter@peterfbrown.com>; TGF TC List <tgf@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [tgf] RE: Request for new items
Dear all
I tend to agree with Nig. There has definitely been a sense of us marking time on the last few calls, but equally I
think TGF is becoming increasingly recognised in the market place (including via PAS181).
Some recent developments I am aware of include:
·
Last week, the Royal Borough of Greenwich published its Smart City Strategy:
http://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/news/article/552/royal_borough_launches_smart_city_strategy_at_digital_hub.
The press notice itself doesn’t mention PAS181, but it featured strongly in what both the CEO and Council Leader said at the launch event, and in the strategy document itself (see link at end of web article). In particular the chapter on service transformation
commits to using the PAS181 standard as the basis for planning and implementing city-wide service transformation.
·
Two weeks ago, ISO’s Sustainable Communities TC voted
start work on new global smart city standard, based on PAS181. This will be called “ISO 37103: Guide to establishing strategies for smart cities”, and I have been asked to be Project Leader for that work.
·
The government of Dubai has launched a new policy on shared and open data, and we’ve been working with them to create a practical ‘how
to’ manual for use by all their government agencies. This has just been signed off by the client, and is being piloted with eight major agencies ahead of finalisation and open publication in Q1 next year. And it explicitly cites TGF as the source for best
practice on data governance. (I am very hopeful that, once this Dubai Data Manual is published next year, they will be happy to submit a Statement of Use to OASIS.)
So although I don’t have a response to Peter’s very understandable request for “a
specific, tractable, proposal for further work”, I tend to agree with Nig that we might regret disbanding at a time when engagement is starting to pick up. So my vote would be to go with Nig’s idea of moving to short quarterly review sessions for the time
being.
On the question of the TC chair, I’m grateful both for Peter’s interim chairmanship and Nig’s offer to take on the role. Normally I would just
have bitten his hand off, but interestingly I’ve just a conversation that suggests another potential option….
When we last discussed this on the TC, the general feeling was that ideally we should get a chair from the government user side rather than the supply
side of the market. I’ve just been speaking with a colleague who fits that bill exactly: Jan McConchie from Australia. Jan was until recently Director of Gov.SA – the service delivery platform for the Government of South Australia. Jan has been a longstanding
advocate of the TGF, and facilitated the Government of South Australia providing a TGF Statement of Use (see attached for ease of reference). Jan is now a freelance consultant, and is keen to get involved in international best practice networks around government
service delivery and service transformation. I mentioned that we were looking for a new chair of the OASIS TC, and she expressed some interest. Like Nig, she would want support around OASIS protocol. Unlike Nig, however, she is clearly an unknown factor
to the TC - and vice versa. So from both perspectives we’d probably need to get to know each other before making a decision. But it feels to me something that is worth exploring – perhaps alongside Nig as a co-chair, to share the work and to create some
sort of demand-side/supply-side perfect synthesis?
If colleagues agree, would it be sensible to invite Jan to attend our next meeting as an observer?
Regards,
Chris Parker
Managing Partner
CS Transform Limited
T: +44 7951 754060
F: +44 207 681 3908
Citizen Service Transformation
From:
tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Greenaway Nigel
Sent: 20 October 2015 15:51
To: Colin Wallis <Colin.Wallis@dia.govt.nz>; 'Peter F Brown' <peter@peterfbrown.com>; TGF TC List <tgf@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [tgf] RE: Request for new items
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
E-mail:
nig.greenaway@uk.fujitsu.com
Web:
http://uk.fujitsu.com
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
From:
tgf@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tgf@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Peter F Brown
Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2015 7:01 a.m.
To: TGF TC List
Cc: Chet Ensign; Scott McGrath (scott.mcgrath@oasis-open.org); Barbara Erbes
Subject: [tgf] Request for new items
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
”Using Information Technologies to Empower and Transform” |
|
|
|
|
|
Unless otherwise stated, this email has been sent from Fujitsu Services Limited, from Fujitsu (FTS) Limited, or from Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Limited, together "Fujitsu".
This email is only for the use of its intended recipient. Its contents are subject to a duty of confidence and may be privileged. Fujitsu does not guarantee that this email has not been intercepted and amended or that it is virus-free.
Fujitsu Services Limited, registered in England No 96056, registered office 22 Baker Street, London W1U 3BW.
Fujitsu (FTS) Limited, registered in England No 03808613, registered office 22 Baker Street, London W1U 3BW.
PFU Imaging Solutions Europe Limited, registered in England No 1578652, registered office Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE.
Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Limited, registered in England No 2548187, registered office Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, Birmingham, B37 7YU.