This is World-Wide-Web site: http://www.nist.gov/sc5wg1/
Go to: WG1 Home Page.
Edited by: Greg Winchester, NEMA, WG1 Secretary, gre_winchester@nema.org .Call to Order
Jim Nell, WG1 Convenor, opened the meeting at 0900 on 1997-April 7. Attending were:
| Jean-Jacques Michel | CETIM | France |
| Peter Bernus | Griffith Univ. | Australia, Task Force Chairman (by telephone) |
| Laszlo Nemes | CSIRO | Australia, (by telephone) |
| Kurt Kosanke | CIMOSA Assn. | Germany, CIMOSA Architecture representative |
| Yoshiro Fukuda | Hosei University | Japan |
| Nobumasa Nakano | Mitsubishi Electric | Japan (Monday only) |
| Emmanuel delaHostria | Rockwell Int'l A/B | US, Chairman TC184 SC5 (Wednesday only) |
| Ted Williams | Purdue Univ. | US, Document editor (Monday only) |
| Jim Nell | NIST | WG1 Convener |
| Greg Winchester | NEMA | SC5 and WG1 Secretary (Part time due to SC5 duties) |
David Shorter, IT Focus, UK apologized.
Hermann Schmidt, the VDMA host, welcomed the experts to Frankfurt and wished WG1 a productive meeting.
DIS 14258, Concepts and Rules for Enterprise Models.
The SC5 Secretary, Greg Winchester of NEMA, reported that he has registered the CD14258 as a DIS. The next steps are to ballot the standard for registration as a FDIS and then as an IS.
New Work Item on Enterprise-Reference Architectures
The primary task for WG1 at this meeting was to continue the process to prepare a standard of requirements for a generalized enterprise-reference architecture and methodology (GERAM) and to discuss an enterprise-representation strategy that will define the standards that are appropriate for WG1 to produce.
A significant resource to be used to develop the enterprise-reference-architecture standard will the Generalized Enterprise Reference Architecture and Methodology developed by the IFAC/IPIP task force. Peter Bernus, IFAC/IPIP task force chairman, worked with WG1 by telephone from Australia. Bernus, assisted in a second telephone call by Laszlo Nemes of CSIRO, and WG1 worked slowly to be sure that everyone understood what is to be the nature and scope of the new standard. A lot of time was devoted to intense discussions of what actually is to be standardized, who are the users, and the meaning of key concepts used in this work; such as, enterprise, architecture, life cycle, framework. By the end of the meeting, WG1 made significant progress toward the objective by reaching consensus on the outline and by assigning writing tasks.
(IFAC/IFIP = International Federation of Automatic Control/International Federation for Information Processing)
The task force is also developing an extensive glossary of terms applicable in the enterprise-representation domain. The glosses in this document will be reviewed for use, as applicable, in the new standard being developed by WG1. Several documents developed by the task force are to be used as resources by WG1. The task force is providing significant human resources to be a part of and assist WG1. Kurt Kosanke distributed to WG1 the latest version of the glossary, which is being edited by Jakob Vlietstra for the IFAC/IFIP task force.
The following inputs (Vienna meeting assignments) have been received and discussed: Jim Nell, Working Draft for New Work Item (N382). P. Bernus, K. Kosanke, GERAM (revised version of Task Force Results) D. Shorter, L. Vlacic, J. Nevin, Business Drivers (draft version). Not received: J. Nevins and T.J. Williams, N364 revised version.
There was considerable discussion about the nature of the standardization task with regard to the GERAM in particular, generic enterprise reference architectures in general, and what should be standardized. In response to comments from the German delegation to SC5, the discussion was concerned with whether WG1 was deviating from the scope proposed and approved in the NP, or new work item proposal. This issue precipitated when WG1 changed the title of the new standard to include the words ÒCompliance Requirements.Ó This begs the question: Compliance to what?, thereby implying that WG1 intended to standardize the GERAM itself to make it something with which to comply. If that were the case, WG1 would have to produce two documents; one for the standardization of the GERAM and one for the compliance requirements.
The intent all along, however, was to produce one standard to offer requirements for a generalized enterprise-reference architecture in order for an architecture to be designated as complete. If one had a particular enterprise architecture, one could use the new standard to evaluate how complete the candidate standard is and exactly where the candidate architecture is lacking. The GERAM, CIMOSA, and other enterprise-reference architectures would be used an examples to illustrate the key parts of the standard as an informative annex. The compliance requirements would be included within the standard as a separate clause. The title of the standard was changed back to be closer to the one used on the New Work Item Proposal: Requirements for Enterprise-Reference Architectures.
During discussions about the scope of the new standard, experts from France, Germany, and Japan, reported that users want this standard to be more concrete than DIS 14258. In France there is a large investment in CIMOSA and GRAI, and there is a need for a more common understanding of modeling methodology, the mechanization process, and languages. In Japan there is interest in interoperability of models among industrial users. There are two views toward model control, tight regulation and non tight regulation with respect to standardization of models. Users are having difficulty enforcing tight regulation of interoperable models with the not detailed and not tightly constrained GERAM enterprise-reference architecture. Needed is a standard with a minimum set of rules based on technical issues of modeling.
All seemed to agree that it would be useful to pattern this standard to replace the European pre-normative standard ENV 40003 Framework for Enterprise Modeling. ENV 40003 has to be revised or replaced as its prescribed life has expired.
The Japanese expert asked for a separate exploder for the GERAM work item--without them on it. The group decided such a system would complicate the WG1 communications too much. The discussion and consensus about scope and depth of the new work item may have mitigated the need for separate exploders as the Japanese expert seemed to feel that a WG1 vector to the work to replace 40003 would be more to Japan's liking.
Attention turned to the development of the standard. An outline was developed (below) and writing assignments were made. There was consensus that WG1 should make certain that we have a common understanding of what we mean by some key terms that will be used in our work. The short list of terms: architecture, framework, life cycle, life history, views, aspects (of models) and type 1 and type 2 architectures (from the GERAM work)
Schedule:
At the WG1 meeting in Tokyo (96-Nov.), WG1 drafted a schedule to plan the development of the new standard and to comply with ISO Directives regarding project target dates.
1997-February-5/7: Select editor (done). Do title (done, redone at Frankfurt), scope (done), rough table of contents (done), define the big issues (begun). Concern: Filtration of the existing reference material.
1997-April-7/9:(Frankfurt, with SC5 meeting): Make filtered reference material available (done), make writing assignments (done), firm the table of contents (done), reconcile inputs; e.g., ISO 14258, comments to ISO 14258, reference documents, GERAM requirements, GERAM descriptive paper. (by June 15)
1997-June-25/27 (Paris: joint meeting with IFAC/IFIP task force) Place the contributions, complete first draft
1997-October-27 (Torino with ICEIMT). Second draft
1998-Early: (Campinas, Brazil, tentative): Third draft.
1998-Spring (France, with SC5 meeting): Prepare first internal working draft
1998-June: Submit working draft to SC5 for CD ballot.
Enterprise-Representation Matrix and Standardization Strategy for WG1
WG1 feels that the enterprise-representation domain for standards lacks both a definitive structure and a strategy for necessary future standards. At this meeting Kurt Kosanke proposed to WG1 a foundation for such a matrix. This matrix places the context of the DIS 14258, the new standard that WG1 is writing, and new work. Emmanuel dela Hostria, the SC5 chairman, feels that the context should be expanded to include SC5 standards. To that end, he proposed at the SC5 meeting to establish an SC5-level project to investigate this matter. To this end the Strategy-Planning Group, SPG, was established to by SC5 resolution 273. Membership will consist of the WG convenors and the SC5 Chair. The first meeting is set for 1997-June-11 in San Diego USA after the TC184 Advisory Group meeting.
Next Meeting: Paris: 1997-June-25/27
WG1 feels that the primary purpose of next meeting is to assemble the first draft of the new international standard entitled: Requirements for Enterprise-Reference Architectures. WG1 has decided on a joint meeting with the IFAC/IFIP task force in La Defense, Paris. In addition, work will continue on the enterprise-representation and standardization strategy.
Adjourn
The convenor adjourned the meeting at 1200 on Wednesday, 1997-April-9
Outline: Requirements for Enterprise-Reference Architectures
| Actor | Number | Clause Title | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction and Rationale | To include beneficiaries: From N364, plus business drivers: Nevins and Shorter | ||
| 1.0 | Scope | From N364, the approved new-work-item proposal | |
| 2.0 | References | Normative and informative | |
| 3.0 | Definitions | Use the task-force definitions as a resource | |
| 4.0 | Requirements for Enterprise Reference Architectures | ||
| Nell by June 15 | 4.1 | General Concepts | |
| 4.1.1 | Architectures and Frameworks | General things before specifics; e.g. type 1 and 2 architectures, distinguish life cycle/life history, views, aspects. A summary of these concepts should appear in the definitions, Clause 3 | |
| 4.1.2 | Framework for Enterprise Models and its role | ||
| Nell | 4.2 | Purpose for Enterprise Reference Architectures | To state those things needed to do process-oriented enterprise modeling; e.g. static and dynamic behavior |
| 4.2.1 | Enterprise Reference Architecture Relation to Framework for Enterprise Modeling | Figure 7 and Others | |
| 4.2.2 | Components and roles of Enterprise Reference Architectures | From N379, Describe concepts in Fig. 7 of Peter B.'s paper plus life history, language | |
| 4.2.2.1 | Life Cycle | ||
| 4.2.2.2 | Life History | ||
| 4.2.2.3 | Views | ||
| 4.2.2.4 | Languages | ||
| 4.2.2.5 | Completeness | ||
| 4.2.2.6 | Role of Humans | ||
| Later | 4.3 | Requirements for Components of an Enterprise Reference Architectures (Normative) | Life cycle; life-history views; languages--human and IT oriented; role of humans |
| Later | 4.4 | Methodologies (Normative) | Talk about how GERA relates to methodologies, languages, tools, unifying terminology, graphical representation |
| Later | 4.5 | Requirements for representation of relations to the environment (Normative) | Human, product and services, processes, resources, infrastructures |
| 4.? | Requirements Enterprise Model Interoperability (Normative) | Unifying terminology, graphical representation | |
| Later | 5.0 | Compliance/Conformance (Completeness) | |
| A.0 | Annexes (as necessary) | The GERAM paper (being revised by Bernus, Kosanke) and other relevant state-of-the-art architectures; e.g. ARIS, CIMOSA, GRAI/GIM, IEM, PERA, will be placed in this annex to demonstrate the use of this standard. | |
| A.1 | Bibliography | ||
| Kosanke by June 15 | A.2 | State of the Art with GERAM as Reference. | Bernus, Nemes, Kosanke GERAM paper, Kosanke's DIISM paper |
| A.3 | Context and vision for Enterprise Reference Architectures |