Dear ESDS Colleagues,

I have been following the postings on this forum with great interest since a
few weeks before IETF 71, where I attended the ESDS BOF, and ever since.

I noticed at the ESDS BOF that a lot of the discussion, and comments
afterwards, seemed to arise from a lack of clarity in the following two main
points:

1.       The need for a crystal clear distinction between "discovery
services" and "information services" (information is a difficult word to
avoid).

2.       Use of terminology like "application" or "supply chain" which mean
different things depending on sector, experience and other factors, and may
unnecessarily limit or broaden the scope according to interpretation.

In my opinion, in order to get an endorsement at the IETF Dublin meeting for
an "ESDS" Working Group, which I happen to believe is crucially important,
the new Problem Statement that will be submitted must at least properly
address the two points above.

For those of you who do not recognise me, I have been the Chairman of the
Project Steering Board of, and also a strong participant in the EU PROMISE
Project, which formally ends on May 14th. Because a number of partners in
the project are strongly motivated to further the work and results of
PROMISE, three of us have already established a company, Promise Innovation
International Oy, in Finland, to continue to carry the PROMISE flag and
rally the troops behind it. We have a fundamental interest and dependency on
the eventual results of the "ESDS" community. 

As we emerge from the PROMISE Project itself, our future vision is for
"Closed Loop Lifecycle Management". Not just product lifecycle management,
or supply chain. We now foresee common discovery and information services
which support the closing of the information loop for almost any kind of
entity, an item, an assembly, a complex product, a pallet of goods, a piece
of baggage,  human food and beverage, animal feeds, pharma, healthcare
patients, animals etc. etc. This is what drives me to believe that the ESDS
Problem Statement needs to be constructed using terminology that is as
neutral as possible. I believe we can do that together! 

I have been prompted to make this posting by Mark Harrison's posting
"Diagrams to help towards a consistent terminology for generic Discovery
Services". I attach a PPT and PDF file of my own diagram, based on Mark's,
which I believe goes part of the way to express what, from a PROMISE point
of view, seems to me to be how the relationship between DS and "information
services" might eventually pan out. I am cautious even to use the phrase
"information services" in case of misunderstanding, but I hope the notes
imbedded in  the attached PPT and PDF files will make the picture clearer.

I claim no "authority" in the way I have used terms in these files, I am
very flexible to find better or more appropriate terminology in everything.
Also the diagram is quite simple and ignores a lot of potential detail, but
the most important thing I want to demonstrate is how the RELATIONSHIP
between Discovery Services, "information services" and their users might be
portrayed.

I look forward to what I imagine might be an interesting discussion!

Best regards,
David.

 



 

The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of
PROMISE-INNOVATION and are intended solely for the named recipient(s). The
contents may be confidential and should not be communicated to anyone else
without our express consent. If you have received this in error please
notify the sender and delete it from your system

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
ESDS mailing list
ESDS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/esds