[Moims-dai] RE: some useful definitions

Wed Mar 25 13:42:03 UTC 2015

Hi Esther and everyone else

I was about to send a reply which made the same point about Frameworks vs Processes - a Framework is something that provides a structure into which more detailed, specific, processes can be fitted.

I agree that a Framework would be what we should aim for initially if we want something that is

1)      Doable in the time available (a couple of years max) - bearing in mind the time that OAIS and ISO 16363 took!

2)      Is widely applicable - bearing in mind that there will be so many details which are different when one moves from one domain to another.
That was the purpose behind the simplified spreadsheet.

The Process model(s) would follow on and may be several separate documents tailored to different domains.
Hence the plan for more detailed spreadsheets

With regard to preservation activities vs other activities - I think it is a useful distinction in that the preservation activities seem to me to be reasonably general at all but the most detailed levels whereas the other activities are, at all but the highest levels, very disparate.  However I agree with Esther that even the simplified spreadsheet does mention many different things - however this is only at a high level and really only in order to provide a context for the preservation activities.

By the way, is there a telecom of any sort today?

Regards

..David

From: Conway, Esther (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 25 March 2015 12:36
To: John Garrett; Giaretta, David (STFC,RAL,RALSP); moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org
Cc: Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr; donaldcarolann at me.com; tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net; rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu; sawyer at acm.org
Subject: some useful definitions

Hi All,

I thought it myself be usefull to circulate some useful definitions of the different models we are looking (mostly pulled from web in a hurry but usefull to base discussions around)

.......................................................
A workflow consists of an orchestrated and repeatable pattern of business activity enabled by the systematic organization of resources into processes that transform materials, provide services, or process information.[1] It can be depicted as a sequence of operations, declared as work of a person or group,[2] an organization of staff, or one or more simple or complex mechanisms.

>From a more abstract or higher-level perspective, workflow may be considered a view or representation of real work.[3] The flow being described may refer to a document, service or product that is being transferred from one step to another.[4]

So what we have from LTDP is a domain specific workflow the stages of which can be abstracted into a Framework
.......................................................

A Framework is a structure, a logical way to classify, segment, categorize, or maintain something.
Frameworks are by definition a little loose. They exist to provide structure and direction on a preferred way to do something without being too detailed or rigid. In essence, frameworks provide guidelines. They are powerful because they provide guidance while being flexible enough to adopt to changing conditions or to be customized for your company while utilizing vetted approaches.

The Idea Lifecycle Matrix mentioned  is an example of a framework and is very loose adoption of the more well known Capability Maturity Model<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_Maturity_Model> or CMM<http://tladictionary.com/index.php?title=C#CMM>. Truthfully you probably won't be that rigid about your ideas but it was meant to be an applicable example.

...............................................................

Processes are probably the easiest to understand since we all work with them daily, even when we don't know it. A process is simply a well defined set of steps and decisions points for executing a specific task. Well planned and deeply understood processes are essential to your ability to automate business tasks (our archival tasks). This is really where that magic happens, a the process level. Generally speaking, processes are highly repeatable and if it can be repeated it can be automated (with exceptions or occasional human intervention of course).

We do need to go to this level to produce something which can be practically implemeted (good stuff fro H2020 or Belmount Forum type Bid)

Best Regards

Esther

________________________________________
From: Conway, Esther (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 24 March 2015 15:16
To: John Garrett; Giaretta, David (STFC,RAL,RALSP); moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
Cc: Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr<mailto:Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr>; donaldcarolann at me.com<mailto:donaldcarolann at me.com>; tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net<mailto:tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net>; rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu<mailto:rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu>; sawyer at acm.org<mailto:sawyer at acm.org>
Subject: Framework vs Process Models

Hi All,

Did a lot of thinking last night .Just a couple of thought in relation to the terminolgy we are using and the structure of the spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet contain stages , actors, activities , output , standards , actuvities use cases

The spreadsheet while bring a extra of clarity I think is mashing a number of concepts that of a Framework , Process Model and Activity Model/Systems Use Case

The Stages and Standards support an approach to createing and Extended OAIS Framework supported by standards

Inputs Activies Outputs , in conjuction with Actors as decision makers support the creation of a Process model ( which I could adapt a BPM methododlogy to do ).

Actors and Activities can be used to develop activity model and/or systems use case

This is evidenced by the change of name from ICLP to ILF . Problems are going to arise becuse processes will cross Framwork stages . This became quite clear to last night as I was trying to forces models input in stages where the stage divides do not naturally exist . Also what relation actors have to and why differentiate between activities and preservation activities(doesnt make a lot of sense in modelling terms,

Would suggest a decision needs to clearly to be made as to whether we are devleoping a Framwork or Proceess, We amay wind up in a mess if we try to to mash the two togher.

I get the feeling that Mike is focussing on lifecysle stage and framework standard, and I have been doing a lot of detailed process stuff as evidenced by the very detailed document I sent round last night which only covered the process input aspects.

However this isn't nescessarily a problem as a group there is natiral realtionship and progression between these things. Forcing me look things from a framework point of view has aleeady caused me to adapt the CEDA/LTDP process models

Lifecyle Curation Framework Model -----> Lifecycle Curation Process Model -----> Activity Model/Use Case (which will included active data mangement Planning functionality) ------> Systems Implementaion (where we can lock things into a Dynamic Data Management tool which would include planning functionailty)

This also means we can follow formal metgodolgies to develop these things . Whille I was keen to leap into the process stuff the natural jumping off point for us should be the frawork model. It also would give us little more to to gather intersested people to enrich the group.

Best Regards

Esther

________________________________________
From: John Garrett [garrett at his.com]
Sent: 24 March 2015 07:51
To: Conway, Esther (STFC,RAL,RALSP); Giaretta, David (STFC,RAL,RALSP); moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
Cc: Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr<mailto:Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr>; donaldcarolann at me.com<mailto:donaldcarolann at me.com>; tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net<mailto:tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net>; rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu<mailto:rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu>; sawyer at acm.org<mailto:sawyer at acm.org>
Subject: RE: Expanded Spreadsheet Attached

Hi,

Apologies if this is a duplicate message.
I tried to send it out at end of today's meeting, but I can't find it again
so I don't think it made it out.

Daniele and I continued work on the ILF Spreadsheet starting with David's
simplified version and Ester's comments and the brief discussion at the
telecon today.
Tuesday discussions will focus on PAIS GB.
We will be discussing ILF again on Wednesday.

Live, Laugh, Love, and Work for Peace,
-JOhn

-----Original Message-----
From: esther.conway at stfc.ac.uk<mailto:esther.conway at stfc.ac.uk> [mailto:esther.conway at stfc.ac.uk]
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 10:51 AM
To: david.giaretta at stfc.ac.uk<mailto:david.giaretta at stfc.ac.uk>; garrett at his.com<mailto:garrett at his.com>; moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
Cc: Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr<mailto:Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr>; donaldcarolann at me.com<mailto:donaldcarolann at me.com>; tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net<mailto:tahoe_mike at sbcglobal.net>;
rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu<mailto:rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu>; sawyer at acm.org<mailto:sawyer at acm.org>
Subject: RE: Expanded Spreadsheet Attached

Hi All,

I have added some commets to David's spreasheet (only about half way
through , as only go this yesterday) in advance of todays ICLP process
telecon

Esther
________________________________
From: Giaretta, David (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
Sent: 19 March 2015 17:10
To: John Garrett; 'MOIMS DAI List'
Cc: 'Boucon Daniele'; donaldcarolann at me.com<mailto:donaldcarolann at me.com>; 'Mike Martin'; Conway, Esther
(STFC,RAL,RALSP); rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu<mailto:rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu>; 'Don Sawyer'
Subject: RE: Expanded Spreadsheet Attached

Apologies if I have misunderstood but I was confused about the things in the
spreadsheet so I attach a simplified one which is, I think, domain
independent. I tried to separate out the very specifically preservation
related activities from the other activities.
I think it maps to the more detailed things in the other spreadsheets.

I hope this helps.

..David

From: John Garrett [mailto:garrett at his.com]
Sent: 11 March 2015 07:45
To: 'MOIMS DAI List'
Cc: 'Boucon Daniele'; donaldcarolann at me.com<mailto:donaldcarolann at me.com>; 'Mike Martin'; Conway, Esther
(STFC,RAL,RALSP); Giaretta, David (STFC,RAL,RALSP);
rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu<mailto:rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu>; 'Don Sawyer'
Subject: RE: Expanded Spreadsheet Attached

Hi,

I'm attaching an updated version of the spreadsheet incorporating the
updates from the LTDP Preservation Workflow v1.0. Updates to the LTDP
sheets are identified in Blue. A couple comments/questions/updates from me
are in Red.

Live, Laugh, Love, and Work for Peace,
-JOhn

From: John Garrett [mailto:garrett at his.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 4:01 AM
To: 'MOIMS DAI List'
Cc: 'Boucon Daniele'; 'donaldcarolann at me.com'; 'Mike Martin';
'esther.conway at stfc.ac.uk'; 'david.giaretta at stfc.ac.uk';
'rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu'
Subject: Expanded Spreadsheet Attached

Hi,

I've added sheets to the spreadsheet that record the activities, inputs and
outputs according the current LTDP Process Workflow. Two sheets were added.
The first is the content of the high-level figure. The second added sheet
is the descriptions, inputs, and outputs detailing the phase activities.

We'll have to see if this format is helpful to us as we try to harmonize our
efforts with theirs.

I think some work could be done assigning activities identified in by LTDP
to our phases so we can generate a crosswalk between our views. We could
also look at the inputs and outputs from LTDP and try to decide where they
show up in our framework.

Live, Laugh, Love, and Work for Peace,
-JOhn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/moims-dai/attachments/20150325/f4a39169/attachment.html>