tgf — archive

FW: [Core_public_service] [Core_publ?ic_service?] Public Review Period

From: Peter Brown <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 20:41:00 -0000

John, My initial assessment can be summed up as: - Use Cases, good; - List of consulted and documented references, good; - Domain Model, appallingly naïve and ultimately useless (literally not figuratively); - References to (and justifications for using) StratML, FRBR, SKOS, etc. seem arbitrary and inconsistent; - I am still listed as a Contributor although I have formally disassociated myself from the work. They shied away from directly using some very well thought through models, like the “Concept Model for the UK Public Sector” ( http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/A-Concept-Model-for-the-UK-Public-Sector.pdf ) that Nig has previously referenced and instead applied the “Not Invented Here” principle. Finally, they have failed in one aspect of their core mission: it is decidedly * not * a vocabulary. Neither is it a domain model (the domain of application is not sufficiently defined) nor a conceptual model (there are too many core concepts missing and too much detail present). Sometimes we just have to give a “total thumbs down” if it damages the OASIS brand and recognition for quality output. I’m not sure we are at that point but certainly not far from it. As to the question as to whether we can use this as the basis or part of our Core Terminology/Reference Model – I would say, simply, no. It is flawed at its foundations and we should not build upon it. When I compare this with the UK effort whose mission was that the model: “ Contains a small number of concepts, which can be applied to any part of the public sector; Is immune to future government reorganisations; Is simple, easy to read and well understood by the audiences ” I would far prefer to endorse this as something worthy of our interest. It fulfils its objectives, is simple, clear, coherent and well designed (and, no, I had nothing to do with designing it!) Cheers, Peter From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Borras Sent: Monday, 11 February, 2013 06:55 To: [email protected] Subject: [tgf] FW: [Core_public_service] [Core_publ?ic_service?] Public Review Period We discussed this item on our last TC call and I’ve copied earlier drafts for your comments. Now the final draft is out for public review and I would like to put a response in from the TC please. I know there were some misgivings about the scope and intent of this piece of work but I hope we can provide some “constructive” criticism rather than a total thumbs down. Can I have your comments please by 22 nd so that I can compile a formal TC response by the deadline of 28 th . I would also like your views on whether we can use this as the basis or part of our Core Terminology/Reference Model. No doubt we will want to add to it but does it provide some basics that we can use? John From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Thodoris Papadopoulos Sent: 11 February 2013 11:57 To: [email protected] Subject: [Core_public_service] [Core_publ ? ic_service ? ] Public Review Period Dear members of the working group, We are pleased to inform you that the Core Public Service Vocabulary has entered its Public Review period. The draft to be reviewed is available at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/core_public_service/asset_release/core-public-service-vocabulary . Please communicate the call for review through your networks. With best regards, Thodoris -- Thodoris Papadopoulos Informatics Development Agency Ministry of Administrative Reform and eGovernance Greece t: +302131306072 f: +302131306020 The information contained in this email is CONFIDENTIAL and may contain proprietary information. It is meant solely for the intended recipient. Access to this email and documents attached by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this communication in error, please, return this email to sender immediately and delete the email, contents and documents from your computer; any retention, disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on this, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.