RE: TLO Recommendation Comments from NT
matthe...@informationjunction.co.uk
Dear Neil,
Thanks for the comments. I’ve copied them here.
NT> Something that strikes me from our previous conversations is the use cases. I like the use of the space time diagram to show how the 3D ontologies are weaker to 4D. Can this be introduced to this document? Walking through a use case and implement maybe a worst case, UML for example through to a middle case, maybe BFO then an illustration of the advised solution? This would make the document useful for practitioners.
My aim has been to be minimalist. I was wondering about including something about this because I agree with you it helps to explain something quite difficult. I left it out in case it was not needed. What do others think?
NT> Secure? - searching ‘secu’ there are two soft mentions of this. Not sure how it ties in to the ontology but will benefit from s stronger mention? – assuming its covered as there are 3 CPNI people on this project!
Hugh asked a similar question. So as Chris pointed out in his response to Hugh, we will need to be able to deal with data about security, but determining what that data is will likely at least in part come from work on the Integration Architecture and how it handles security at a functional level. In the great scheme of things, security data though important is not that special, i.e. not more difficult than temperatures or pressures, which I would not expect to see in the FDM themselves, though the infrastructure for them probably would be. So we will have it, the question is rather where it will end up. That is open.
NT> Is there a consideration of containerisation? The work we [Atkins] has done with UKAEA is looking at virtualisation of not only the data but the operations on that data. This might be out of scope for this paper, but a nod to how the vast amount of data is used in the sciences is a key reference point.
Another good question. Generally I would say we are looking at the separation of data from the applications that use it, especially since we are looking at use cases that arise from bringing data together from different sources and then using the data together for something which would have its own application. It would be useful to look at some particular use cases for containerisation to see if this falls within our scope.
NT> From a CDBB perspective I would like to know how much influence we need to apply to owners of these. As we have previously discussed I would like to have an idea of the level of budget required to facilitate the adaptation / update of these ontologies.
You’ll need to give the “owners” lots of money😊 Fortunately, Chris Partridge and I (and a few others dotted around here) are prime movers in each of these four. An unstated reason for creating something based on these rather than picking one is that it means we are creating a new work that we control the destiny of.
There was another typo that has been fixed.
Regards
Matthew West
From: Thompson, Neil (Digital) <n.tho...@atkinsglobal.com>
Sent: 18 August 2020 16:38
To: Matthew West (Information Junction) <matthe...@informationjunction.co.uk>; A.E.A. Luck <alex...@cdbb.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: TLO Recommendation Comments from NT
This email and any attached files are confidential and copyright protected. If you are not the addressee, any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. Unless otherwise expressly agreed in writing, nothing stated in this communication shall be legally binding. The ultimate parent company of the Atkins Group is SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. Registered in Québec, Canada No. 059041-0. Registered Office 455 boul. René-Lévesque Ouest, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2Z 1Z3. A list of Atkins Group companies registered in the United Kingdom and locations around the world can be found at http://www.atkinsglobal.com/site-services/group-company-registration-details
Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.