W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > April 2009

RE: Interoperability ..

From: Oscar Azanon <oscar.azanon@vitruviosistemas.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:41:59 +0200
To: "'eGov IG'" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <006001c9bf62$4a1721e0$de4565a0$@azanon@vitruviosistemas.com>
Sure, Jose – will update the section and will let you know by next week .

 

Cheers!

 

ocr

 

De: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] En
nombre de Jose M. Alonso
Enviado el: miércoles, 15 de abril de 2009 23:36
Para: Oscar Azanon
CC: eGov IG; Vassilios Peristeras
Asunto: Re: Interoperability ..

 

Hi Oscar,

 

Please, also remember that Trond sent several that I think should be added
to the section, too:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Mar/0025

 

There are also 4 open issues related to interoperability that you should
think about at:

http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/issues/open

 

Although we have time until the 26th, the sooner authors can send texts or
add them to the document itself, the better, so people could see them sooner
and still have some time to comment on them.

 

I think that adding the suggestions sent by Trond and Vassilios could
improve the section significantly. AFAIR, you have a jigedit account and can
edit the doc in place, just keep me updated so I could make the necessary
changes according to W3C pubrules if needed.

 

Cheers,

Jose.

 

 

El 15/04/2009, a las 9:56, Peristeras, Vassilios escribió:

Hello Oscar,

 

I would agree that this part is a bit weak.

 

Some suggestions you may find relevant for strengthening it:

 

·         There is an EIF 2.0 draft version already, [1] which presents a
slightly different definition from the 1st version (see part 3.3.1.1 of the
document).

·         A collection of interoperability definition and a relevant
discussion can be found at [2].

·         From EU some relevant references include [3] (study on local and
regional interoperability problems with suggestions to the various
stakeholders), [4] an initiative to create a reusable library of
interoperability assets at the EU level

·         Some national interoperability initiatives (not sure whether these
are the latest versions of the documents):

o        Germany,
<http://www.e-gif.gov.gr/Portals/0/standards-and-Architectures-for--Governme
nt-applications-version-3_0-pdf.pdf>
http://www.e-gif.gov.gr/Portals/0/standards-and-Architectures-for--Governmen
t-applications-version-3_0-pdf.pdf

o        Australia,
http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/australian-government-technical-inter
operability-framework/index.html

o        UK, http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/schemasstandards/egif.asp

o        Esthonia,
<http://www.e-gif.gov.gr/Portals/0/Estonian%20IT%20Interoperability%20Framew
ork.pdf>
http://www.e-gif.gov.gr/Portals/0/Estonian%20IT%20Interoperability%20Framewo
rk.pdf

o        New Zealand,  <http://www.e.govt.nz/standards/e-gif>
http://www.e.govt.nz/standards/e-gif

·         In the definition part, the ID documents example discusses a very
specific aspect of IOP and does not touch other important aspects (e.g.
semantics, organizational and legal issues, etc).

·         In the benefits section, I would add:

o        Organizational coherence and integration: Interoperability is a
means towards more coherent and integrated operation for the overall public
administration domain. The current stovepipe organization of public
institutions prevents the horizontal movement of information and allows only
vertical flows according to the bureaucratic paradigm (command-report).
Cross-agency interoperability makes the horizontal flow of information
feasible and allows better communication and coordination amongst separate
agencies.

·         In the Main Issues and Limitations section I would add:

o        Cultural/Political Aspects: In general and historically, public
agencies have developed a culture that does not promote cross-agency
sharing. In many cases, agencies are reluctant to change existing processes,
open data and services to external parties and re-negotiate their way of
operation with external parties, who owns and controls what, in the new
environment that usually appears after the execution of an IOP project that
links together two or more agencies.

 

[1] http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/servlets/Doc?id=31597

[2] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.104.6619
<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.104.6619&rep=rep1&
type=pdf> &rep=rep1&type=pdf

[3] http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/7038/254

[4] http://www.semic.eu/semic/

 

 

Best regards,

Vassilios

 

 


  _____  


From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Oscar Azanon
Sent: 14 April 2009 22:00
To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
Subject: Interoperability ..

 

Hello everybody,

 

I’m looking at the interoperability section and I suggest we should push it
a little bit forward .. Has someone identified any topic missing in the
current status, or alternative visions?

 

Another question raised – can someone provide pointers to experiences /
standards / etc. we should mention? For instance, government
interoperability frameworks, etc.

 

Thanks!

 

ocr

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.57/2060 - Release Date: 04/15/09
06:34:00
Received on Friday, 17 April 2009 13:42:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 17 April 2009 13:42:48 GMT