[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ubl] Data (Core Component) Harmonization - Some ideas from another community - Review request
Hi Stephen, Thank you very much for taking the time to review the document and to offer your comments. You might be interested to know that some of the work has already been done, see http://www.itsregistry.org.uk/harmonisation.html The contractors supporting HA seem very capable as both domain experts and information engineers. For example, they have done the work with a UML tool and are exploring additions to UML to capture certain data harmonization linkages. Some of these extensions may also be relevant to the alignment of different implementations of the CCTS. Regards, Andy -----Original Message----- From: stephengreenubl@gmail.com [mailto:stephengreenubl@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Green Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 7:41 PM To: ubl@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ubl] Data (Core Component) Harmonization - Some ideas from another community - Review request Hi Andrew, I take it it is OK to make a response to the list. The interesting approach of trying to avoid reinvention of entities, components, ontologies, etc is that the need changes from one of design to one of research and deep domain-specific knowledge. As we all know though in UBL TC this is the ideal everyone seeks but which is not always realised: domain experts are hard to find when the work has to be mainly, dare I say it, voluntary. If the UK wishes to emphasise recruitment of domain experts rather than system designers then that would have to be sustained to a greater extent than we are currently used to :-) I tried to word it tactfully but couldn't do better than that :-) It would, needless to say, be very expensive (if it wasn't already) to spend a lot of time and hard costs on researching what is already implemented or recruiting experts in what is already implemented. Typically though the expertise never seems to go far enough to meet this ideal and some reinvention becomes more the rule than the exception. Getting a whole host of people together who actually know in detail what existing systems use for business entities and components without the need to invent is perhaps just a dream in my experience. Usually there is a fair bit of guess-work alongside the gap analysis, even though that side of things might get downplayed. What therefore worries me about standardising this is that the embarassing guess-work goes unacknowldged, or worse, gets covered up and people's expertise exaggerated. A nice ideal though. Best regards Stephen D Green 2009/3/3 Andrew Schoka <AMSchoka@comcast.net>: > Dear UBL TC, PSC and TSCers, > > > > ISO Technical Committee 204, Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS), recently > published a Technical Report entitled “Intelligent transport systems — > Systems architecture — Harmonization of ITS data concepts” as ISO TR25100. > The scope of the TR is “the harmonization of data concepts that are being > managed by data registries and data dictionaries such as those described in > ISO 14817:2002, a domain-specific implementation of ISO 11179. The > foundation data definition approach is ISO 15000-5, Core Component Technical > Specification (CCTS). The TR compares and contrasts a number of approaches > to data harmonization including that of UN/CEFACT TBG17 however, it makes a > distinction between inventing core components from requirements and > discerning core components from existing systems. > > > > A key activity is the ongoing work being done by the UK Highways Agency and > their supporting contractor, Mott MacDonald. I had a recent opportunity to > interact with a principal investigator of that work and he is soliciting > feedback regarding his fundamental approach to data harmonization and > whether it should be extended to reflect more detailed formulations of how > data elements from different projects can be related. That work would be > reflected in an update to ISO TR25100. I have attached his seminal document > of core component analysis and invite you to review it. I believe that some > of the concepts presented in the paper could well offer benefits to how > independent UML implementations could be harmonized amongst themselves as > well as with the UN CEFACT Core Component Library. > > > > I welcome any opportunity to engage in a discussion of this paper with the > idea of providing the author feedback as well as possibly applying it to > UBL. > > > > > > Regards > > Andy Schoka > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > -- Stephen D. Green Document Engineering Services Ltd http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]