Recommendation V0.4

[matthe...@informationjunction.co.uk]

Dear Colleagues,

Please find attached an updated version of the Recommendation document, updated based on Steven Kraines comments (thank-you). This is a new baseline, I am not showing tracked changes.

There were a couple of discussion points that Steven raised, and I’m glad to see he has mentioned these in a recent email. This means we will be able to pick these up in general discussion. I will address them as soon as I can. Neil Thompson also has some general comments that I will pick up in a separate email.

Regards

Matthew West

[Al]

Hi Matthew,

Here are my comments on the document.  It is concise and clear (apart from, in my view, the diagram... you'll see my comments). 

Thanks for sending it round.  Good timing to get it out before some well-earned leave!

Al

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "UK NDT FDM" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to uk-ndt-fdm+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/uk-ndt-fdm/003b01d67581%24fb256050%24f17020f0%24%40informationjunction.co.uk.

[matthe...@informationjunction.co.uk]

Dear Al,

Thanks for your comments. I’ve adopted most changes you have suggested but on Figure 1 you said:

 

“I find this image a bit challenging because it looks like it is biased towards data discovery and opportunistic query.  As I interpret the image it misses the obvious and most likely use-case of exchange/integration – that of client-supplier (or client-client) interaction.  This is where most of the inefficiency / friction / economic gain is to be found.  I admit that any simplified diagram is not going to universally hit the mark but if I was a reader from Industry I wouldn’t necessarily see it as relevant to me.

The NDT is (notionally) a collection of distributed Digital Twins that are brought together by the integration architecture, with consistency being achieved through universal use of the RDL/FDM (this does not preclude multiple data formats/encapsulation/transfer methods being supported).  The twins would therefore sit more outside than in the distributed messaging system (they could all make use of common IML components to lower the cost and improve the consistency & trust in the interfaces with the messaging system.

It also looks like the FDM and RDL are languishing at the base of the tombola (or whatever it is).  It would be better to show the FDM&RDL with (all) the data exchanges being referenced to / based on it.  The goal really can be for all the messaging contents to be based on the FDM & (distributed) RDL.  If there is a catalogue it can also be based on it.

I appreciate that this diagram pre-dated the document but a recommendation before publishing it would be to revisit the graphics.”

It is not so much that I disagree with what you have said, but that what is important about the introduction is continuity with the Pathway document. This is a key diagram from that document, and whilst not perfect, kit is also not wrong. So whilst getting to a better diagram of the IMF is a worthwhile end in its own right, this is not the place to do it (IMHO).

 

You added the last sentence to this section:

 

3. It will need to be stable.
   When requirements change, problems can arise because for your existing data model to meet the requirement, changes to what you already have may be required as well as additions. This is expensive for those who are using the data model as they have to restructure their data, and as a result, in practice, some organizations do not use the latest version which means consistency is lost.  If left unchanged the future cost of change can increase significantly, further inhibiting a goal for consistency.

It might be that I should add something, but I don’t think this is it. I’ve added: …, which defeats the object of the exercise.

 

Thanks for finding the right bit on security. I’ve added an extended part of this section to the appendix which hopefully meets Hugh’s needs as well.

 

There are a few other updates to do, and I will issue a revised version in a day or two.

 

Regards

Matthew West

To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/uk-ndt-fdm/61e3df55-202a-2da2-300c-4222f5b22161%40criticalinsight.co.uk.