OMG Integration Consortium The Open Group Workshop Notes Washington, DC 4th November 2004

1
OMG / Integration Consortium / The Open Group
Workshop NotesWashington, DC 4th November 2004
2
Attendees (with interests, where captured)(some
not captured here as this was initial list)

• Charlie Betz, Accenture / Best Buy
• Metadata management
• Loren Brown, OMG
• Work with Mike Guttman on MDA Faststart
• Chris Caputo, Blue Phoenix
• Cory Casanave, Data Access
• Fred Cummins, EDS
• Chair of OMG Business Integration TF
• David Cuyler, Sandia Labs
• Applying both TOGAF and MDA in work
• Greg Eakman, Pathfinder Solutions
• Bill Estrem, Metaplexity Associates
• TOGAF consultancy
• Mike Guttman, OMG
• OMGs Faststart program
• Dwayne Hardy, DoD / OSD
• Ed Harrington, Data Access Technologies, Chair of
  Workshop
• EA Tools and Consultancy
• Rother Hodges, NUWC

Judith Jones, Architecting-The-Enterprise TOGAF
consultancy Toshi Kurokawa, CSK Antoine Lonjon,
Mega Steven Maienza, CGI Tony Mallia, Ciber,
Inc. MDA consultant Pete Rivett, Adaptive /
OMG Modeling and EA consultancy John Schmidt,
Worldwide Integration, Inc. John Shockro,
Raytheon John Spencer, The Open Group Director,
Architecture Forum Akira Tanaka, Hitachi General
interest George Thomas, GSA Using MDA Fred
Waskiewicz, OMG Director of Standards, OMG Brian
Wood, Open IT
3
White Paper Review

• Pete Rivett
• TOGAF provides the method, MDA the outputs
• Value of MDA is much more than code generation
  also metamodels in business arena, etc, very
  relevant to EA

4
John Spencer TOGAF Update

• See John Spencer Presentation
• The final graphic needs to capture feedback from
  MDA to TOGAF

5
John Schmidt Integration Consortium

• Working on a Global Integration Framework
• Terminology
• Integration Patterns
• EA methodology
• Integration Methodology
• Modeling to capture metadata in support of
  integration
• Collect this set into a framework
• Released GIF Version 1 May 2004
• Two components TOGAF and MDA
• 3-year roadmap, each year move the GIF forward
• Judith leading architecture work, Pete Rivett
  leading repository work
• In this workshop role of end-user
• Why do we need these things working together?
• Need to translate theoretical solutions into real
  business benefits

6
Fred Waskiewicz MDA

• Model driven approach to specification and
  implementation of systems and apps software
• Foundations
• Abstraction
• Open standards
• Tools
• Abstraction
• Separate business concerns from underlying
  infrastructure, allowing both to evolve
  independently
• Open Standards
• All OMG standards when published are publicly and
  freely available
• Tools
• OMG members have the expertise

7
Fred Waskiewicz MDA (continued)

• Update on specs / standards
• Query View Transformation RFP (standardized
  mapping from PIM to PSM
• Model to text transformation RFP
• XMI finalization
• Reusable Asset Specification
• SPEM capturing artifacts for software
  development process
• Completeness, process definition
• UML2
• MOF2 coordination
• Superstructure
• OCL
• Profiles extensions to UML to embrace, e.g.,
  specific platforms
• MDA Users Guide
• Key principles in technical terms
• SIG chartered as forum to discuss
  implementations, issues, etc. migrating to
  advisory group on holes in MDA specification
  suite
• MDA Faststart providing outreach, practical
  assistance to start

8
Fred Waskiewicz MDA (continued)

• Types of specs
• Modeling (used by tool vendors to build tools)
• To store info in models
• To interchange models
• Specific to particular vertical domains
  particular services
• Not existing specs for establishing policy
  data information models

9
Pete Rivett - TOGAF / ADM Mapping

• See Pete Rivett Presentation Slides
• General / Prelim Phase
• SPEM can be used to model the TOGAF method
• ITPM (IT Portfolio Management Facility)
• Integrating technical and business metamodels
• Managing IT assets in context of the business
• Not about detailed models of system construction
  (UML does that)
• Requirements
• Parties (people, orgs)
• Agreements (SLAs, license, etc.)
• Processes
• Business Process Definition Model business
  process equivalent of UML
• Control
• Change management
• Deployment elements
• Links to reusable asset spec
• Deployment

10
TOGAF / ADM Mapping (continued)

• Question
• Metamodel or model?
• Both links both to specs and to real people and
  assets
• Status
• In finalization anyone can raise issues,
  Finalization TF will address
• Relationship to ITIL?
• ITIL set of standards out of UK govt, got
  traction recently in US. Definitive
  representation of terms like change management,
  incident management, etc.
• Best practice, no standards for the specific
  outputs or things managed
• Will integrate other standards
• Judith we are working on integrating TOGAF with
  ITIL a further opportunity for synergy

11
TOGAF ADM Mapping (continued)

• Phase A
• BMM (Business Motivation Metamodel) addresses
  Why column of Zachman
• Principles
• Discussion unclear whether covered by BMM
• Fred OMG need to think about the gaps identified
  here whether there should be anything done in
  OMG to fill gaps
• TOGAF output versions increasing refinements
• Refining from large visions to increasingly more
  specific definitions
• Would be useful in listing these OMG standards to
  identity which of them are usable today in tools
• Judith emphasis on pictures not really
  modeling
• Pete just because high level, does not mean you
  cant model
• DJ Two levels what the arch uses for own
  purposes, and what is used for communication with
  stakeholders and builders
• Collaboration with 1471?
• Fred In UML 2, drew on CMU work, which in turn
  drew on 1471

12
TOGAF ADM Mapping (continued)

• Phase B
• Need to understand more clearly how TOGAF treats
  business functions
• BSBR may also be a candidate
• Viewpoints
• Use cases
• Business Definition use of activity diagrams
• The fact that you can divide the UML into
  different (organizational) business sectors
• Disconnect in UML on activity diagrams versus
  swim lanes (?)

13
TOGAF ADM Mapping (continued)

• Phase C Data
• CWM not just warehouse any information
  structure
• Also has an E-R model (not a normative OMG
  standard)
• Also high-level CIM - ontologies of UML etc.
• UML itself can be used for the conceptual data
  model
• Need to understand more about data
  interoperability
• Data lifecycle
• SPEM?
• UML / data activity modeling?
• Life history diagrams
• Data security
• CB Data Management Association producing a lot
  of material in this space (and data stewardship)

14
TOGAF ADM Mapping (continued)

• Phase C Applications
• Brian Wood MDA concept of separation of concerns
  (CIMs / PIMs) is important point here.
• E.g., CIM night capture business rules of a
  transaction payment PSM would model the IT
  implementation

15
TOGAF ADM Mapping (continued)

• Next steps
• Pete Suggestion for further work - go through a
  worked example of where someone had applied
  TOGAF, and illustrate the use of MDA tools in
  that environment

16
John Schmidt - Case Study

• Used the Envision tool
• Had a proprietary data model (non-MOF compliant)
• Documentation required human intervention to
  correlate charts, documents, etc.
• Leakage theft, breakages, pricing errors, etc.
• Example when implementing a price change, had
  to physically call up stores to check had been
  registered on tills.
• No links between the architecture and the
  implemented systems relied on human
  intervention
• Why MOF? CB Already in use in data management
  group
• All details relevant - any level of detail
  ignored involves making assumptions and therefore
  involves some risk
• Maintaining metadata is all about process
• Organizational change can lead to new
  applications (e.g., existing app splits into two
  copies each with a life of its own)
• TOGAF implies superordinate view top level view
  of boxes (systems of systems). Also subsystem
  view?

17
End-of-Morning Discussion

• Fred MDA is not waterfall - rather
  round-trip
• When code developed, validation tests are run to
  update models with operational systems
• Judith This is being recognized in TOGAF Version
  9. Need to ensure operational changes reflected
  in the architecture.

18
Brainstorm

• Many relevant specs being worked in Business
  Enterprise Integration TF
• IT Portfolio Business process Definition Org
  structure etc.
• Want to develop architecture model management
  paper
• Had inputs from several business process modeling
  orgs
• A definition of all the models is an envisaged
  output of this work
• A scheme of all the models
• What can be implemented now near term
• Whereas TOGAF is process oriented, this is
  product oriented
• Also a framework for prioritizing what needs to
  be filled
• Current OMG rules implementation has to be
  available in 18 months effectively 2 years for
  main product
• CB With MOF, can immediately use models in some
  form
• Bringing everything down to MOF is not always
  best approach
• SPEM and Portfolio need to implement two
  metamodels and have them interwork

19
Brainstorm (continued)

• DJ Arch Forum themes
• Architects Workbench feeds into all the other
  tooling
• Interchange format between arch tooling and
  developers tooling with 2-way transformation
• Architect sends a model to the developer if
  something wrong, needs to be able to send back
• Requires constraint languages etc.
• Need discussion of terms and concepts
• Not clear what the architect does. Does architect
  produce CIM model? One level of PIM, taken over
  by developer?
• A reference process needed to clarify who does
  what.
• What does TOGAF say about this?
• Not defined
• Have skills frameworks roles and experience
  levels for the roles in different architectural
  disciplines.
• Implementation Governance is nearest we have.
• TOGAF 9 will address much more thoroughly
• Also defining the IT Architect profession

20
Brainstorm (continued)

• John Schmidt chart showing roles (in
  presentation)
• Brian Still need to define the deliverables
  produces versus what the developer produces.
• In the Bus Component Factory, the architect is
  concerned with defining the packing, the
  developer products the model
• Also need to refine the concept of the MDA
• Object and reference Model S/C
• Feed into that work where within the process do
  particular models fit?
• E.g., where exactly does the CIM fit?
• TOGAF also has had problems - Vision and
  execution
• Need to understand what this means in a model
  driven approach
• What pattern / type of model should be sued in
  which context? COMBINE says arch should be
  concerned with rules for developing models, the
  developer generates the models in accordance
  with those rules.

21
Brainstorm (continued)

• Big difference when doing systems of systems
  single system models do not scale to this.
  Different stakeholders. If integrating, have an
  integration team responsible for wider integrated
  system. Requires different viewpoint structure
  super-ordinate view. Individual systems are black
  boxes. This is slightly at odds with MDA - CIM
  and PIM are meant to relate to both wider system,
  system of systems, and single system. In real
  contract situation, you have to get specific at
  the platform level.
• Depends on level of abstraction. At higher level
  will have a PIM which models only the touch
  points.
• Fred We do ourselves a disservice explaining
  CIMs and PIMs.
• DH I come from SE background IT is just one
  part of overall system. Two architectures
• Functional (business / logical)
• Physical / technical (solution)
• Even at physical level you may have several
  levels of abstraction
• Ideal approach would be recursive

22
Brainstorm (continued)

• MDA has major role to play in technology
  architecture and new areas for TOGAF9
• Architects need to think in terms of building
  blocks
• FredC OMG has evolved from designing systems a
  lot in that space. We have an interface for
  modeling UML, MOF creating, managing and
  integrating models. TOGAF wants to leverage that
  interface. Dont really want to worry about PSMs?
• DJ No makes big difference to me whether I am
  doing push or pull or pub/sub.
• FredC Designing implementation of the system is
  IT problem. Designing solution to business
  problem is the business problem.
• Judith TOGAF has Enterprise Continuum, in which
  Architecture Continuum guides and directs
  Solutions Continuum. If Architecture Continuum
  not done right, affects Solutions Continuum.
• Architecture Continuum is output from
  architecture development phase covers IT as
  well as business. Covers whole of enterprise,
  conceptually.

23
Brainstorm (continued)

• FredC Not excluding you from the IT.
• DJ Architecture Continuum PIM, Solutions
  Continuum PSM?
• FredC You dont have to go down to the actual
  code.
• (Discussion about what the architect actually
  does)
• TOGAF covers business change, but the architect
  is not necessarily responsible for doing the
  business change.
• Need to define exactly what the architect does.
• Brian May fulfil several roles, but acting as an
  architect in all of them. Have to define what an
  architect is in terms of what he produces. So
  need to think in terms of roles.
• FredW So you want guidelines for roles
  consumers will make own choices about how to
  adopt / adapt those
• Judith Starting to do that in TOGAF 8.1 skills
  framework.
• If you have a role of integrating architect and
  another role of implementing architect
  different roles.
• Overuse of architect term (but TOGAF can be
  applied in each of those areas).

24
Brainstorm (continued)

• FredC Instead, define concerns and the models
  created to address those concerns. Would like to
  see a set of models developed that addresses all
  the concerns identified in TOGAF for the
  Architect.
• E..g, start with an organizational model.
• At each phase / step, define the concern, define
  the model needed to address the concern
• DJ The learning architect needs to understand
  what to produce
• TOGAF defines / creates a market for tools
  vendors who will produce these models. Need to
  articulate the problem well.
• Judith How can we get an architecture
  description language that will work from the very
  high levels to lower levels? UML is great as far
  as it goes but not sufficient.
• Need to include business process
• FredC UML not designed for the semantics for
  which you want to use it. Eventually will run
  into problems.

25
Brainstorm (concluded)

• Danger waiting for the ultimate language. Some
  of it cant be done. But if you dont take the
  tools and use it to do want to do, youll never
  do anything. UML can do a lot already.
• Judith I find UML hard to use in Phases A and B
• FredC In designing the business, UML doesnt
  work there.
• Need to characterise them in terms of the types
  of models they are (in terms of the business),
  not in UML terms. So can properly integrate them.
  
• Judith need to integrate with business
  modellers.
• Tony Millia Example in banking industry using
  UML.
• FredC But business models do it better.
• Ed In GSA they call it line of sight
  traceability from to bottom and all the way back.
• DJ We dont have the concept of building
  blueprint defined. In building industry a
  blueprint given to builder.
• Tony Millia?What goes into which blueprint?

26
Bill Estrems Slides

• Determinants of Technology Strategy (diagram
  relates to Product development, but applies here
  also)
• Internal / external environment
• Generative / integrative mechanisms
• Strategic action / organizational context /
  technology evolution / industry context
• Architecture sits over strategy harder to
  change strategy than architecture
• Which is where MDA comes in
• Need to make more manifest the outputs from
  architecture work
• ADM not the only part of TOGAF
• Other tools in Resource Base could be improved by
  synergy with MDA
• Enterprise Continuum
• Top is arch continuum, bottom solutions continuum
• Left to right is general to specific

27
Bill Estrems Slides (continued)

• Terrys TOGAF ADM Deliverable Map (from Banff)
• Maps Phases to internal / external
• Stage Gate Model
• Each stage have crisp definitions for how you go
  thru.
• Projects can get killed at each stage
• Maybe architecture projects should have a similar
  scrutiny and realistic assessment?
• Resource Base
• Allocating Resources
• Product change / Process change
• Breakthrough projects
• Platform projects
• Derivative projects
• Recommendations for managing architecture
  projects / resource allocation to
• E.g., State of Minnesota has an EA-PMO.

28
Bill Estrems Slides (concluded)

• Ed Time to market is important. ADM-MDA will
  help that.
• CB Typically architects dont talk about the
  money. If they could talk money, it would be
  relevant
• DJ Dont accept that architects dont talk
  money.
• Ed EA in Federal government is a way of
  addressing requirements of OMB.
• DJ Dairy Farm Group used architecture as a
  necessary gate to obtaining funding.
• If you dont have IT governance as part of EA
  review process, all you have is an academic
  exercise. End up with analysis paralysis.

29
Summarization / Quick Wins (discussion)

• Continue Pete Rivetts work identifying holes
  in mapping between ADM and MDA
• DJ One part of ADM mapped to MDA and a model
  created.
• JSchmidt Agree - take one arch deliverable,
  define it explicitly in terns of MDA semantics.
• Users need more prescription whats the
  template?
• Tony Millia TOGAF Applications Architecture
  outputs may be at a good level.
• JSchm Need to define something do-able in 2/3
  months.
• DJ Need a case study.
• Cory Work in reverse direction MDA models that
  already exist, show where they fit in TOGAF?
• DJ Still need a case study.
• Did Big Retailer do any models?
• Yes. Used a proprietary tool. Want to take this
  open method.
• TM Has to be system of systems, high level,

30
Summarization / Quick Wins (discussion -
continued)

• GSA model? supplier, broker, customer. Modeling
  the business. Value chains of business processes.
  Roles and relationships between roles.
• Want to have two models and the transformation
  between them.
• How about generating a report out of a model, as
  an example of transformation?
• Logical data model - physical data model - data
  dictionary
• Tony Millar will produce a report from an
  architecture
• Has to be done by one person and peer reviewed.
• Cory still think we should take peoples
  existing architecture and see where they fit.
• Tony I can do something take the TEAMS models
  
• JS I will ask the TEAMS project if we can have
  access to the models that they have used.
• Brian I dont have Word I want to see the
  structure
• Word document that presents the model in terms of
  Word

31
Judiths Slides Proposals for Next Steps

• Accelerated approach
• Core team domain specialists
• Larger reviewing team
• Everyone else
• Used for TOGAF8 / DODAF alignment
• OMG, IC, use similar approach
• Lots of projects on going
• Proposal for Joint Initiative Board to coordinate
  between three consortia (and others if they join)
• Cory OMG submitters work outside of OMG
• FredW Core SC, Reviewing team AB
• Judith there are several potential projects here

32
Judiths Slides Next Steps (continued)

• Bill
• use tools to support development of building
  blocks?
• OMG involved in requirements? Not so far but
  SysML.
• Meta SIB Current SIB is an out of date
  collection of standards. Meta data repository to
  store industry standards, plus architectural
  patterns and building blocks.
• OMGs Reusable Asset Spec. is very relevant
• Brian This is overkill for where we are
  currently
• Ed Include in minutes TOGAF documentation URL
• TOGAF webinar?
• Yes!
• Ask Pete and John to continue thru to complete?
• Yes
• Gap analysis would be very beneficial

33
Judiths Slides Next Steps (continued)

• DJ have space in Manhattan, McLean VA. Anyone
  willing?
• Bill I would be willing to see from our agenda
  at San Francisco
• This group is the review team. The core team
  would be those willing to meet.
• Core volunteers Ed, DJ, JS, BE
• Review team volunteers (all)
• Status of licensing relating to the output of
  this project?
• Need to consider off-line
• JS Each body to take and use in own way?
• JS The Open Group and OMG have their next
  respective meetings in San Francisco in
  consecutive weeks at the end of January. Schedule
  a workshop for the intervening weekend?
• Some interest canvass again later
• Ed Regular conference calls Fridays.

34
List of Other groups relevant

• DAMA (Phase C)