Re: Framework Report (28 Apr 09)

> hi Chamindra


>
> Do these definitions cover the gap between
> - systems
> and
> - interop standards
> - to match a needed use-case?
>


i am not sure if they do :-) lets work it out
we may have to develop the paragraphs accordingly and fill any bits that are
not yet covered in the section



> If by systems you mean systems in use, then I would say that falls under
> the pragmatic bracket



in the note, we define three dimensions (at least, in fact  4) for
addressing an interoperability gap (the (syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and
conceptual)

then we project these dimensions across different fields of interop,
communication, medical, etc etc

so I would say that matrix should help us define the 'interoperability gap'
which is a broad description of possibly everything that does not
interoperate, down to a few specific factors.
I would say that any use case can be broken down

give me one  or two example of interop gap that you are referring to, and I
ll try to map the case with the proposed method of analysis, in fact we can
map all of them if you want

do not hesitate to let me know if there is something that I should develop
further, or if you need further explanations

hope this clarifies

>
>
> ------------------------------
> The syntactic gap in communication is caused by different language
> schema notation, where the schemas are not compatible. This gap is
> generally bridged by 'mapping' elements of a schema to another
> syntactic representation.
>
> The semantic gap characterizes the difference between two descriptions
> of an object by different linguistic representations, for instance
> languages or symbols. In computer science, the concept is relevant
> whenever ordinary human activities, observations, and tasks are
> transferred into a computational representation.
>
> The pragmatic gap results from the difference in organisational and
> social context of the communication layer, which contributes to
> different operational and information models, and therefore can be
> viewed as the result of the combinatorial explosion of the 'context'
> to knowledge on the web. Pragmatically challenges to knowledge reuse,
> and relevant contextual dependencies, are considered not merely
> technical, but belong to the realm of social and organisational
> systems design and management, and extend well into the boundaries of
> what is designated as 'policy' management.
> -----------------------------
> l.
>
>
>
> chamindra de silva
> http://chamindra.googlepages.com
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>
> wrote:
> > The HTML version is now up:
> >
> >  <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/XGR-Framework-20090428/>
> >
> > or
> >
> >  <http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/XGR-framework/>
> >
> >
> > Cheers...  Renato Iannella
> > NICTA
> >
> >
> >
> >
>



-- 
Paola Di Maio,
****************************************