- From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:00:18 +0200
- To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
- Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org, Christopher Testa <ctesta@ushmm.org>
Hi Owen, Sorry for the late reply. I was traveling and offline most of the time. El 15/09/2008, a las 19:13, Owen Ambur escribió: > Jose, I'm beginning to get the sense the eGov IG may be foundering, > perhaps > because the scope of the Group Outline may be too large. > http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/GroupOutline Thanks for bringing up the subject. It is the first time we hear someone in the Group talking about it since we announced it last week. Do you think that it's just too large or do you have any additional comments about its organization? Do you think the steps described there are the right ones and in the right order? > My suggestion would be to include *only* those objectives for which > at least > one person has indicated willingness and ability to complete the > required > tasks. My main concern so far about the Group it's been its scope. An issue we've been facing at W3C since we started to look into this was that eGovernment as topic is *huge* and I believe that if we want to succeed in the short term, the Group needs to be very well focused. Unfortunately, I don't believe we are yet. Your suggestion sounds reasonable to me. It was the Chairs' original goal to do it this way, hence we choose TF coordinators as owners of the task topics. Unfortunately, it's taking too long for people to tell them if they'd like to cooperate on that given topic, and summer in the northern hemisphere has not helped either. I encourage the TF coordinators to take ownership of the topics, go ahead on their own and hope others will join the TFs to help them. Fortunately, some have already showed interest and I hope those will fulfill the requirements you suggest above. Chairs are arranging a call with TF coordinators asap to talk about this, and some more changes are coming very soon. > Regarding standards, I'd suggest that we start with the U.S. Federal > Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Technical Reference Model (TRM) and > identify > W3C Recommendations as well as OASIS standards that are not in the > TRM but > should be. See http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#FEAPMO & > http://www.w3.org/TR/ & http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/index.php > > I would describe the intended result as a strategic plan for > interoperability, and if the IG decides to take on this task, I am > more than > willing and able to: > > a) assist in identifying standards missing from the TRM, > > b) document the results in StratML format, and > > c) on behalf of the IG, use the ET.gov site/process to propose > inclusion of > the identified standards in the TRM. I know that you and others in the Group are very knowledgeable of the US Federal Government stuff. I welcome the opinion of those about this. In my opinion, some of the steps would be a bit tricky for us to accomplish. Although I can understand a) and that could be done with OASIS help (we'd need to check with them) I'm not aware of all the implications of going through b) and c). Where's the existing list? I see you are skipping here most of the preliminary steps in the Group Outline (stories and the like) and going directly to some of the specific issues already identified in the charter and giving a very concrete case. Do you think it's better to do our work this way? Anyway, this is at last a very specific proposal that I welcome and would like to see others discussing. Thanks, Jose. -- Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org> W3C/CTIC eGovernment Lead http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/ > Owen Ambur > Co-Chair Emeritus, xmlCoP > Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee > Member, AIIM iECM Committee > Participant, W3C eGov IG > Membership Director, FIRM Board > Former Project Manager, ET.gov > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org > ] > On Behalf Of Jose M. Alonso > Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 12:10 PM > To: public-egov-ig@w3.org > Subject: canceling 17 Sept. call; next one on 1 Oct. > > > Dear Group, > > Given the number of regrets we got so far, including both of your > Chairs, we are sorry to announce the cancelation of the call scheduled > for next Wednesday, 17 Sept. > Next Group call should take place on 1 October. > > We haven't heard many comments yet about the Group Outline and > Activity Plan we proposed a few days ago, and expect you to comment > about them in the mailing list. > > We also request again topics for the Agenda that is evolving as usual > at [1] or for the F2F meeting that will take place 23-24 October. I've > just started a wiki page at [2]. If you are planning to attend, please > register at [3]. > > Best, > Jose. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/Next_Meeting > [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/TPAC2008 > [3] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2008 > > > -- > Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org> W3C/CTIC > eGovernment Lead http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/ > > > >
Received on Friday, 19 September 2008 17:00:59 UTC