archive-org.com » ORG » J » JEFFSUTHERLAND.ORG

Total: 379

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World '97 Tutorial Overview
    run over the Internet The speaker will cover architecture implementation and design strategies essential to capturing the benefits of object technology on the information highway He will recommend strategies and tactics for building Intranet systems faster better and cheaper than possible with alternative technologies positioning application architectures for rapid Internet evolution and low life cycle costs and preserving current investment in legacy systems Prerequisite Responsible for implementation of client server applications on the Web 1 Business Objects and the Evolution of the Internet 9 00 10 30 A revolution has got to leave the world with a totally different view of itself its got to be a paridigm shift Object oriented programming became viable when it went global When you have a revolution like this don t think about applets We re talking about a situation where the whole content of your machine is going to have a different shape to it 2 Objects to the Web Intranet Client Server Design 10 45 12 00 Basic concepts object messages methods classes encapsulation inheritance Case driven design using object oriented analysis and design Infrastructure requirements for productivity reusability scalability Four tier web architectures 3 SCRUM Reengineering the Development Process 1 00

    Original URL path: http://jeffsutherland.org/objwld98/owmain.html (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Minutes, Meeting 7, X3H7 Tech. Comm.
    of Meeting Discussions Tuesday 17 Sep 96 Administrivia Glenn Hollowell Chair Joaquin Miller will provide Jeff Sutherland minutes of ad hoc meeting 1 5PM on 15 Sep Minutes of June 96 meeting by Joaquin Miller will be reviewed after lunch Need to meet in late November to finalize the U S position to ISO Australia meeting We will develop about a 10 page submission and take two days to work on it on December 6 7 in Boston at IDX Next Meetings 6 7 Dec 96 Boston IDX Systems prepare U S position for ISO Australia meeting submissions due by 25 November 10 11 Mar 97 Austin Joint with X3J21 and OMG BODTF 23 24 Jun 97 Montreal Joint with X3J21 and OMG BODTF 17 18 Nov 97 Princeton Joint with X3J21 and OMG BODTF Agenda Reports on work completed Haim Kilov contribution Discussion of what is needed next Gathering of work assignments Making work assignments Prepare ballot response for ISO new work item Reconcile RFP Response Evaluation Guidelines with RM ODP requirements Tom Digre Reconcile RFP Response Evaluation Guidelines with RM ODP requirements Tom Digre There is a different in perspective At yesterday s BODTF meeting the BOF was viewed as part of the engineering viewpoint On Page 6 of the Business Object Facility Response Evaluation Guidelines the BOF is considered part of the information and enterprise viewpoint It was my interpretation of the last ISO meeting that BOF was part of the engineering viewpoint This needs to be clarified at the next ISO meeting It depends on how your are looking at how you specify the BOF facility Bryan Wood There are different views on this I originally viewed the BOF as a mechanism like OLE COM that allowed plug and play Cory Casanave Chair BODTF views BOF as an underlying application framework that is used to build vertical application domain frameworks Jeff Sutherland What Tom has written is good in that it dicusses it from all viewpoint perspectives I don t see a problem here There will be a problem with lack of clear specifications in the submissions Haim Kilov Example Rumbaugh has week specification of relationships they are just links in most cases RM ODP precisely specifies relationships Some statements in responses may be based on vague concepts like Rumbaugh s and not precise specifications as in RM ODP Haim Kilov Since you are looking at the BOF facility you may want to evaluate it from all viewpoints This is different that looking at the specific use of the BOF which may be an engineering issue Bryan Wood Here is an example of how viewpoints work Depending on your needs you make focus on a different subset of viewpoints Joaquin Miller Serveral people recommended deletion of last sentence in Engineering viewpoint paragraph which states This viewpoint does not need to be addressed by BOF it is implied by CORBA On Page 7 bullet stating Additional enterprise viewpoint concepts were suggested needs to be clarified and amplified Only some of these concepts are defined in RM ODP Part 2 Haim Kilov There are some relationship management specifications in the enterprise viewpoint but they may appear elsewhere as well Bryan Wood The object model for the order system in the addendum by Oliver Sims needs improvement Sale or agreement needs to at the center of the model Relationships needs to be better specified Haim Kilov can provide some enhancements There was a discussion of the limitations of graphical notations which Haim prefers to avoid Others thought they were useful You need an object modeling notation to provide a description of each viewpoint Bryan Wood There are two RFP s out for OOAD and a meta object specification There is a requirement that responses to these be mutually supportive Bob Hodges At Tools a document interviewing Rumbaugh Booch and Jacobson was presented Jacobson stated that dynamic sematics are not yet in the Unified Model They are working on it Haim Kilov There was an inadequate response two years ago on this issue of how to describe behavior Joaquin Miller Review of work assignments Assignments in minutes from last meeting were reviewed Haim Kilov has a submission Tom Digre upgraded the BOF RFP Response Evaluation Guide Business rules for the enterprise viewpoint of RM ODP Haim Kilov Haim walked the Committee through the document briefly Glenn raised the question of how to use the document in preparing the U S contribution to ISO The Outline for Draft New Standard was reviewed ISO ISE JTC 1 SC 21 N 10387 Rev 1 Business rule specifications and patterns for reuse are the essential concepts and Part 3 2 is an appropriate place for them Hiam Kilov Business specification says what the business does This does not include workflow detail Business design says how the business does it This includes workflow and specification of what part of the business will be automated System specification and system implementation follow from business design It would be an important contribution to bring the General Relationship Model into this work and it should be called to the attention of other companies prior to the ISO meeting in Australia Bryan Wood There is an explicit reference to the GRM Haim Kilov If ISO standards are needed for standards work they can be reprinted for this purpose Joaquin Miller will followup on this Jean Paul Emard ANSI Washington D C is the individual to communicate with Action Haim s instruction for the next meeting is to provide a paragraph on Business Rules for Part 3 2 of the outline US ballot comments on SC21 N10387 New Work Item Proposal for Enterprise Language A draft was reviewed and minor changes made Votes will be taken at the end of the day on these comments Motion Persons not present at the end of the day will give their votes on the ballot to the Chairman within the next day Passed by unanimous consent Development of Work Items Discussion of Terminology in OMG RFP4 Guidelines Many of these concepts are used in RM ODP Part II but need enhancement Contract set of mutual obligations mutual agreement between parties that governs collective behavior policy is part of a contract for a community to reach its objectives cannot change the context of a contract without changing the contract in ODP Community Role defined within contracts in ODP Process activity Life Cycle Time Objective Relationship Rule In RM ODP a party person corporation has a role when he becomes a homeowner He becomes part of the community of homeowners This can be viewed as a composite relationship between party and homeowner Or homeowner can be viewed as a subtype of party Or homeowner can be a plug in to the party object reuse by delegation Within the enterprise viewpoint there are two things that are important Haim Kilov community of behavior and state different viewpoints are necessary to define a computing system Desire retire early and wealthy Goals invest in stocks and bonds etc Composition of desire and goals is a concept Action work for next meeting Process activities and life cycles Karsten Reimer Contracts uniform commercial code integrating feedback Haim Kilov Coordinate Texas Instruments position paper on these concepts Glenn Hollowell Motion Approve minutes of X3H7 7 June 96 Meeting Passed by unanimous consent Motion Change Ballot title to RM ODP Enterprise Language and Relationships to other Viewpoints Glenn Hollowell second Frank Manola Passed 6 for 0 against 4 abstentions Motion Change text in clause 2 1 as indicated Joaquin Miller second Frank Manola Therefore there exists a clear need to describe how the viewpoint languages are used together for creating application architectures This description shall be based on existing RM ODP definitions in IS 10796 2 as refined by IS 10796 3 and the new concepts and constructs defined for the new enterprise viewpoint After discussion the change was amended by unanimous consent to Therefore there exists a clear need to describe how the viewpoint languages are used together for creating application architectures This description shall be based on existing RM ODP definitions in IS 10796 2 as refined by IS 10796 3 and the new concepts and constructs defined for the new enterprise viewpoint Passed 7 for 0 against 1 abstention Motion Change text in clause 2 2 as indicated Brian Wood second Glenn Hollowell There are no provisions for interoperation with a model prepared for some other enterprise nor do such models link in a rigorous manner with system specification languages Passed by unanimous consent Motion Recommend to X3T3 that they should respond to the Ballot item by voting yes with the editorial comments adopted by X3H7 Glenn Hollowell Frank Manola second Passed 7 for 0 against 1 abstention 4 PM Presentation CF RFP5 MetaObject Facility A D RFP1 by Sridhar Iyengar Unisys What does metadata management mean in the context of OMG What kind of facility could be used in multiple domains Work has narrowed focused to OOAD models In June 1996 RFP5 was issued at Australia meeting The Architecture Board scoped down the two RFPs and partitioned them into separate areas of concern A MetaObject Facility Set of IDL Interfaces that manipulate meta meta model B Meta meta model Defines how meta models of OA D CF will be specified C O AD CF Set of IDL interfaces that support creation and manipulation of A D models D OA D Meta Model Enables semantic interoperability and tool interoperability across OA D methods O AD Visualization Meta model Set of notations and explanations to enable communication between humans about OA D artifacts Relationships between Models Abstraction Examples Typical Purview Domain Objects Telephone customer Bank customer Application vendor Common Business Objects Customer Warehouse Framework vendor Business Object Facility Plug and play components Framework Operating system vendor Object Analysis Design Models Class diagram State transition model Use case Tools vendor Meta Object Facility Class Relationship Model Repository Framework vendor OMA Object Model Interface Operation ORB vendor An abstraction level s model element becomes next higher abstraction level s meta model element The Business Object Facility has been inserted into this chart by Jeff Sutherland It is related to the Meta Object facility and repository structure however and this may not be the optimal placement The original chart was provided by OA D TF Mary Loomis BOF MOF and OA D RFPs are scoped down partitioned and will be harmonized Deadlines for all of these will be 15 April 1996 allowing various groups to work together Handouts for this presentation are on the Web Minutes of this meeting will be submitted to Joaquin Miller in RTF format for posting The Committee invites submissions related to the outline of the work item for development of the standard and explanatory papers on the concepts Submissions for the next meeting are due on 25 November Adjourn Addendum Joint Meeting with OMG Business Object Domain Task Force 16 Sep 96 Joaquin Miller Session Chair There will be three speakers this morning addressing how to develop business specifications for object oriented systems ISO Standards Deontic Logic as a way to fully specify business rules Practical application of business specifications to IBM customers Speaker Glenn Hollowell OMG Business Objects and Open Distributed Processing Enterprise Viewpoint Standards Conditions WG7 and OMG have established reciprocal relationships Committed to keep WG7 and OMG standards as synchronized as possible WG7 adopted OMG IDL as definition language for ODP OMG RFPs ask respondents to state their conformance to ODP if not why not OMG Business Object standards will be relevant to ODP ODP Viewpoints to OMG Business Object Correspondence Engineering BOF Technical Enterprise BO Information Computational ODP Enerprise Viewpoint Work Item BO overlaps Enterprise Information Timeline Working draft Jan 97 at Australia meeting Committee Draft CD Jan 88 Two CD versions with increasing stability voted on by international bodies Draft International Standard DIS Jan Jul 99 Stable editorial changes only International Standard 1999 Future ODP work Item Mapping ODP defined functions and OMG Business Object Facility like DCOM to CORBA mapping as part of Engineering Viewpoint Contacts and Contributions x3h7 shl com enterprise shl com X3H7 Web site under construction contact miller shl com to subscribe X3H7 info contact glenn ti com Tom Rutt X3T3 and head of WG7 delegation X3T3 is looking to X3H7 to do this work Bryan Wood fluent in ISO ODP standards Need US position at X3H7 meeting tomorrow Joaquin is interim editor Questions Cory isn t BOF relevant to computational viewpoint Bryan Wood this is an issue that needs to be worked out BOF provides distribution transparency so there is certainly an aspect of BOF that is the infrastructure that belongs to the Engineering Viewpoint This is just a indication of the kind of mapping that will evolve Joaquin Miller ODP specifies that any computer system is not fully described unless all five viewpoints are described Tom Rutt X3T3 is interested in participating in Enterprise language work but not in application framework efforts The new work item contains both of these issues Oliver Sims Where can we get information on ODP Bryan has copies of the documents on diskette X3H7 Web site will provide access to these documents if ISO allows it We will be using PDF format Speaker Dr Randy Johnson National Security Agency X3J21 What are the obligations of computer systems to humans and what access should they have to other computers Randy is a logician was in academia last five years in formal specification languages for NSA Deontic Logic as a language for specifications What ought to be true what is forbidden what is permitted Should enable you to express things in clear concise unambiguous and brief language in contract to huge amounts of boilerplate that lawyers use Must learn a new language but no harder than a programming language Contrast between simplicity and expressive power is central to logic Logical languages allow you to have it both ways clean and simple as well as highly expressive The job of logicians is to define these is the best possible way The first thing to talk about in the syntax Next are the rules of reasoning Third is precise semantics We will have time to talk about the first two Deontic logic is an extension of proposition logic p q r stand for propositions which are statements of fact Randy has a blue shirt on this morning Connectives or and not implies equivalent A or B is an expression that means not not A and not B which is the disjunction Personal aside In Tibetan philosophy the ultimate insight is accessible only by negating the negatee It is not true that there is no personal identity At the same time one cannot say there is identity There is no self in the ultimate sense Disjunction does not work in this case The computer analogy is that objects have unique identifiers so it is not true that there is not identity At the same time these identifiers are normally not visible so they do not exist in some sense Even when visible there is an absolute minimal amount of uniqueness only that they are different they are arbitrarily chosen and one is the same as any other except for the uniqueness feature The partitioning of the underlying reality is arbitrary but by attaching different attributes and relationships to the arbitrarily partitioned identity the world of form appears A A implies B modus pundis most common rule of inference B Predicate logic adds to the power of atomic assertions For all x p x means it is not the case that there is an x that doesn t have the property There exists an x such that p x means it is not the case that for all x it fails Box A means that A is true and necessarily true Diamond A means that A is true but not necessarily true We are still in the general setting of modal logic It happens to be true that Randy is wearing a blue shirt but that is not necessarily the case He could have worn the green shirt in his closet Box A implies B implies Box A implies Box B This is commonly taken as a good axiom A implies B Box A implies Box B Box distributes across an implication A A Box A A It is very difficult to say some things in English that are crystal clear when using symbols Most logicians accept the proposition above but not the propositions that A implies Box A Anything that is a correct rule of logic is necessarily true This is the fundamental assertion of logicians OA means A is obligatory PA means A is permitted FA means OA is equivalent to not permitted not A PA is equivalent to not obligatory not A A implies A is OK OA implies A means whatever ought to be true is true Not always the case OA implies PA If it is obligatory it must be permissible You need this OA implies OPA It is permitted implies it ought to be permitted In the world there is often more than one obligation at the same time federal vs State law etc Logicians handle this with more than one deontic operator and make one take precedence over the other If you can t assign precedence you are in trouble Standard deontic logic A implies O A implies B implies OA implies OB OA OA PA If something is provable as a logical statement it should be true This is standard in that it is simple widely known and lots of philosophers have argued against it FA implies F A and B follows from the standard deontic logic theorems If I beat him up and rob him this is forbidden But then I make restitution This must be permitted and may be obligatory So this theorem is problematic Deontic logic is useful in the real world where what ought to be true

    Original URL path: http://jeffsutherland.org/x3h7/h7meet18.html (2016-04-27)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World Tutorial

    (No additional info available in detailed archive for this subpage)
    Original URL path: /objwld98/ow_boa.html (2016-04-27)


  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World Tutorial

    (No additional info available in detailed archive for this subpage)
    Original URL path: /objwld98/ow_design.html (2016-04-27)


  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World Tutorial

    (No additional info available in detailed archive for this subpage)
    Original URL path: /objwld98/ow_scrum.html (2016-04-27)


  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World Tutorial

    (No additional info available in detailed archive for this subpage)
    Original URL path: /objwld98/ow_webdb.html (2016-04-27)


  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World Tutorial

    (No additional info available in detailed archive for this subpage)
    Original URL path: /objwld98/ow_benefits.html (2016-04-27)


  • Jeff Sutherland's Object World Tutorial

    (No additional info available in detailed archive for this subpage)
    Original URL path: /objwld98/ow_tools.html (2016-04-27)




  •