[Css-rasg] RE: RASIG/SM+C Overlap Telecon #1 Notes

[Barkley, Erik J (317H)]

Mario,

In principle I tend to agree with your notion of using well recognized industry terms rather than having CCSDS invent equivalent terms. What gives me pause are the practicalities. The general computer industry moves very rapidly as compared to space missions. I think that I would be more comfortable agreeing to recommend that there be a bit of the deliberative process in governance and adoptions of terminology for CCSDS in general. I think the largest area for overlap with regard to industry recognized terminology re CCSDS most likely lies within the service oriented architecture (presumably "SOA" is an industry-standard term with a lot of effort behind it) realm of computing, but here again there is in fact no authoritative resource to point to exact definitions at least that I am aware of.  I can readily uncover many acronyms servers related to computer terms by doing a quick Google search and therefore have no confidence as to the authority of one site versus another.   So, do we say that http://www.soaglossary.com/ is authoritative and CCSDS relies on this?  Or do we prefer the much shorter set of terms found via http://www.soa-in-practice.com/soa-glossary.html   ?  Or perhaps we look to sister standards bodies likeW3C, OMG etc., to help with this?  If so, this would then argue for a bit of a liaison type process as well for maintenance issues etc.

So at the end of the day, my conclusion is that in fact only CCSDS can really say what is authoritative with regard to its terminology. It may be that we borrow rather heavily here and there on some of the "definitions of the day" but we may have to apply a little bit of elbow grease so to speak to capture them as formal CCSDS definitions such that CCSDS books reference a proper glossary, and that we agree on the definition even though it is "well-recognized".  So, again, in principle I agree with you but I'm just a little concerned about the practicalities involved.  Now, an ontology for this might be interesting....:)

As perhaps an interesting related suggestion we could also perhaps consider getting the robotic mission scenarios identified by RASIG as part of the general CCSDS vocabulary. There are indeed I believe multiple cases whereby classifications and profiles of missions would be useful and it would be nice to see this being used with regard to common terminology.

Best regards,


-Erik

From: Mario.Merri at esa.int [mailto:Mario.Merri at esa.int]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 5:48 AM
To: Barkley, Erik J (317H)
Cc: 'Colin.Haddow at esa.int'; CCSDS RA SIG; Leo.Hartman at asc-csa.gc.ca; Nestor.Peccia at esa.int; Shames, Peter M (313B); roger.thompson at scisys.co.uk; Sam.Cooper at scisys.co.uk
Subject: RE: RASIG/SM+C Overlap Telecon #1 Notes


Erik,

not to be pedant, but my point on Red ID 1 was more than just the glossary. Do you agree with the entire point as described in my email below?

Ciao

__Mario

From:

"Barkley, Erik J (317H)" <erik.j.barkley at jpl.nasa.gov>

To:

"Mario.Merri at esa.int" <Mario.Merri at esa.int>

Cc:

"'Colin.Haddow at esa.int'" <Colin.Haddow at esa.int>, CCSDS RA SIG <CSS-RASG at mailman.ccsds.org>, "Leo.Hartman at asc-csa.gc.ca" <Leo.Hartman at asc-csa.gc.ca>, "Nestor.Peccia at esa.int" <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>, "Shames, Peter M (313B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, "roger.thompson at scisys.co.uk" <roger.thompson at scisys.co.uk>, "Sam.Cooper at scisys.co.uk" <Sam.Cooper at scisys.co.uk>

Date:

24/09/2010 09:00

Subject:

RE: RASIG/SM+C Overlap Telecon #1 Notes


________________________________



Mario,

Thanks very much for the comments.   Re Rec ID 1:  Glossary update and maintenance - agree and I will update this in the spreadsheet.

Re Rec ID 2:  I will see what I can do about the timeframe question.  Obviously sooner is better, but, as we know, resources are not exactly plentiful in CCSDS so I will have to check with the membership of SMWG and see what seems reasonable/feasible.  Consider this an action on my part.

Best regards,

-Erik

From: Mario.Merri at esa.int [mailto:Mario.Merri at esa.int]
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 9:31 PM
To: Barkley, Erik J (317H)
Cc: 'Colin.Haddow at esa.int'; CCSDS RA SIG; Leo.Hartman at asc-csa.gc.ca; Nestor.Peccia at esa.int; Shames, Peter M (313B); roger.thompson at scisys.co.uk; Sam.Cooper at scisys.co.uk
Subject: Re: RASIG/SM+C Overlap Telecon #1 Notes


My comments:

Rec. ID 1
I believe we agreed that on one hand CCSDS has "domain-specific" terminology (e.g. telemetry, return services) which must be preserved. On the other hand, when the terminology overlaps with more generic domains (e.g. services) where the industry standards are worldwide consolidated, we should give preference the these in order to make the CCSDS specifications clearer and unambiguous. We also agreed that the revamping of CCSDS glossary is a very much needed activity which should provide a set of unambiguous terms that are used across CCSDS specs and that should be maintained under configuration control. Clearly, we are not there yet and a, once the glossary will be available, a long-term plan should be made so that all specs could be migrated to use consistent terminology.

Rec. ID 2
I know that we have not discussed at the telecon, but it would be nice to time-frame the agreed exercise to test MAL as a re-factoring technology for SM.

Ciao

__Mario
From:

"Barkley, Erik J (317H)" <erik.j.barkley at jpl.nasa.gov>

To:

"'Mario.Merri at esa.int'" <Mario.Merri at esa.int>, "Shames, Peter M (313B)" <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, "Sam.Cooper at scisys.co.uk" <Sam.Cooper at scisys.co.uk>, "Leo.Hartman at asc-csa.gc.ca" <Leo.Hartman at asc-csa.gc.ca>

Cc:

CCSDS RA SIG <CSS-RASG at mailman.ccsds.org>, "Nestor.Peccia at esa.int" <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>, "'Colin.Haddow at esa.int'" <Colin.Haddow at esa.int>, "roger.thompson at scisys.co.uk" <roger.thompson at scisys.co.uk>

Date:

24/09/2010 02:21

Subject:

RASIG/SM+C Overlap Telecon #1 Notes




________________________________




CCSDS Colleagues,

Following is a brief summary with regard to our teleconference on Wednesday, 22 September 2010.  The bulk of the teleconference conclusions have been captured in the summaries on the Excel spreadsheet (under the column "draft conclusions"). Obviously this is just my take so please provide corrections as you deem necessary.

Best regards,

-Erik

---Telecon Summary---

Attendees:  S. Cooper, M. Merri, L. Hartman, P. Shames, E. Barkley

Topics discussed:
               Overlaps and SEA AD Recommendations -- see updated spreadsheet
               ExoMars Architecture - key personnel not available for update
               Telecon Schedule prior to London - two more telecons to be arranged (done)
               London face-to-face meeting - agreed to meeting Tue AM the week of the meetings


[attachment "d1-SMC-OverlapSolutions-23-Sep-2010.xls" deleted by Mario Merri/esoc/ESA]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/css-rasg/attachments/20101004/9f5485e7/attachment.htm