RE: OMG specs and reference implementations



RE: OMG specs and reference implementations

From: Jrn Guy S <jgsuess_at_itee.uq.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 09:49:30 +1000
Message-ID: <000801c67ad5$b7a849c0$4e406682@itee.uq.edu.au>
Dear Laurie,

Sorry, if my remarks appeared to be overly harsh. However, I chose my words
purposely, but maybe they require additional clarification. 

In stating that 'research groups do not _appear_ as players', I wanted to
express that in specifications, researchers and their associated
organisations are not credited for the contributed work, unless they are
(substantially) paying members. I would be happy to know that this practice
has changed though.

In stating that '(research groups) ... and can not provide substantial
input' I meant to express that although researchers may attempt to
contribute, the process is not designed to allow traceability of any input.
(Thus 'traceable impact' would be a preferable replacement for 'substantial
input'.) This especially concerns the work of FTFs, which are meant to
resolve problematic issues of emerging specifications. Their 'issue lists'
are not available to non-members, and the surprise of seeing an issue, which
was raised and was believed to be resolved, re-emerge in a final version is
usually the smallest of problems. The archive of this list contains good
evidence of this.

Finally, I am certainly aware of the DSTC Pty Ltd. The presence of the DSTC
at UQ was a main motivator for my move to this university and the input the
DSTC had into the OMG is doubtlessly sizeable. However, the DSTC is a
proprietary limited company (Pty. Ltd.), so it is not quite such a good
example to show your point.

Certainly, the OMG is a useful institution, as it provides inspiration for
companies like Xactium and Microsoft. And one would hope that the
freshly-released QVT standard will see the wide practical adoption, which
the enthusiastic panel at UML/Models 2004 expected.

Otherwise, I would like to take further discussion of OMG-related points out
of this forum, as it does not really contribute to a mailing-list on precise
modelling.

Jrn Guy S

Research Officer

Room 350, General Purpose South Building (building 78) Division of Systems
and Software Engineering School of Information Technology and Electrical
Engineering The University of Queensland Queensland 4072 AUSTRALIA

Phone: +61 7 3365 2883; Fax: +61 7 3365 4999

email: jgsuess@itee.uq.edu.au

-----Original Message-----
From: puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk
[mailto:puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Laurence Tratt
Sent: Friday, 19 May 2006 08:36
To: puml-list@cs.york.ac.uk
Subject: Re: OMG specs and reference implementations

On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 11:07:27AM +1000, Jorn Guy Suess wrote:

Dear Jorn

> However, the OMG has not elected or promoted a reference implementation.
> This is mainly for political and economic reasons, as it would force other
> members of the OMG to comply. Also, the OMG is a commercial organisation,
> so research groups do not appear as players and can not provide
substantial
> input.

There are many flaws with the OMG process (the non-requirement of reference
implementations being but one example), but you're being unfairly harsh in
stating that research groups "do not appear as players". For example, as
you're now based in Queensland I'm sure you're aware of the substantial
impact that the much missed DSTC research unit had on many OMG standards,
and there have been various academic organisations who have put a lot of
effort into the process at one point or another.

Yours,


Laurie
-- 
http://tratt.net/laurie/     -- Personal
http://convergepl.org/       -- The Converge programming language
http://sosym.dcs.kcl.ac.uk/  -- Software and Systems Modelling Team
http://modelsconference.org/ -- MoDELS/UML 2006 conference



To remove yourself from this list please mail
puml-list-request@cs.york.ac.uk
with a message containing the word "unsubscribe".
Received on Fri 19 May 2006 - 00:49:46 BST