W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > December 2001

Use case: Department of Defense - DISA

From: Stanton, John <StantonJ@ncr.disa.mil>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 23:40:05 -0500
Message-ID: <D6EC0AD017C1D4119CAF00204804F0CCB1E8ED@rbmail101.chamb.disa.mil>
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Cc: "Swatski, Leonard" <swatskil@ncr.disa.mil>, "Miller, Kim A." <miller1k@ncr.disa.mil>, "Barnette, Jim" <barnettj@ncr.disa.mil>
Every use case expressed so far can provide
leverage across the DOD in weapons; networks &
Command & Control systems - especially when
coupled with Agent Oriented Software Engineering.
What the DoD always seems to need falls into
two areas, in my judgment - security & formal
methods that produce interoperable products.

Formal methods is not so much meant to focus
on formal methods of expression as in -  
context-free or context-dependent requirements
expressed by narrative rules; or doing our
own variant of Backus-Naur Form. What I mean
is a connected; iterative standards development
process that connects the standard under definition;
the model; and a conformance testing system as
they evolve TOGETHER. If  all three of these
elements evolve together in a clearly defined,
intentional process, DOD can save money,
and many other wondrous events can also occur.

We purchase as much software as a Fortune 50
company. When we encounter a product that is 99%
interoperable, the other 1% costs us millions
of dollars to transport across platforms; or
engineer expensive, weird work arounds that
then require expensive life-cycle maintenance.

  When encountering this 1% non-interoperability,
it can often be traced back to both the lack of
formal methods of expression within the standard;
but most often to the absence of an intentional
overall standards development process, exploiting
intentional software engineering, using iteration
between the three major elements to produce quality;
modeled; tested and evolved products. So... we
suffer with these products having no way to test
conformance; not understanding exactly what we
have purchased, costing millions of dollars.

I have prepared a 5 page paper titled,
"A Generic QA Framework for Most any Standard Fora"
and would happy to forward it after I get back from
Oakland (Schema F2F), if there is interest.
It might help me in explaining what the DoD
really needs here. It is in MS/Word, and that's
not being cool, I have been clearly told.

Respectfully - John Stanton
Received on Saturday, 1 December 2001 23:40:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:46 GMT