Featured Post
These days, I mostly post my tech musings on Linkedin. https://www.linkedin.com/in/seanmcgrath/
Saturday, September 27, 2003
One shot and your gone
This camera, in *one shot*, would fill to the brim, the first hard disk I ever had - the mighty Winchester.
Friday, September 26, 2003
Enterprise architecture cannot be bought (like happiness and love).
John Gotze writes about handcuffs and Enterprise architectures. He is, of course, absolutely right. Stakeholders gotta own this stuff, not vendors
You have to, have to, have to, own your own architecture and *critically* the data that flows around it. The tools and techniques and knowlege are all there but it is not a product. You cannot buy this off the shelf.
Most critically, what is needed is not simply XML. XML is just a fancy alphabet. It gains you very little in terms of ownership and control unless you apply it intelligently.
You need standards - your standards - for semantic representation of business data - completely independent of any technology stack. You need to understand how data conforming to these standards will flow around your enterprise architecture. You need to tuck these into Appendix A of your RFT.
That is the only way you will ever get true ownership over your own enterprise. Without it, your just constantly posting (expensive) bail to take the handcuffs off something you always thought to owned but you didn't.
You have to, have to, have to, own your own architecture and *critically* the data that flows around it. The tools and techniques and knowlege are all there but it is not a product. You cannot buy this off the shelf.
Most critically, what is needed is not simply XML. XML is just a fancy alphabet. It gains you very little in terms of ownership and control unless you apply it intelligently.
You need standards - your standards - for semantic representation of business data - completely independent of any technology stack. You need to understand how data conforming to these standards will flow around your enterprise architecture. You need to tuck these into Appendix A of your RFT.
That is the only way you will ever get true ownership over your own enterprise. Without it, your just constantly posting (expensive) bail to take the handcuffs off something you always thought to owned but you didn't.
Thursday, September 25, 2003
Wednesday, September 24, 2003
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
Most overloaded word in the whole of IT?
My vote goes to "messaging". E-mail, SMS, EDI, MOM, Instant (e.g. AIM), Object Oriented Method Invocation (message passing). Others?
Blogging goes mobile
This article on mobile blogging contains a phrase I had not heard used before about blogging "homesteading the web". Describes it well I think.
Monday, September 22, 2003
Interoperability in Construction
This site is a source of two types of information for me - information on interoperability and rich a source of metaphors about physical engineering.
It never ceases to amaze me how, how the same interop issues crop up time and time again in very diverse areas - construction, telco, healthcare, government etc.
It never ceases to amaze me how, how the same interop issues crop up time and time again in very diverse areas - construction, telco, healthcare, government etc.
Sunday, September 21, 2003
Induction versus deduction - social software
Interesting article that takes a view of social software that I had not considered before - inductive versus deductive systems. There is something in this (I have an upcoming ITWorld article that wonders about the whole area.).
I'm having trouble with language though (as usual). If I write an algorithm to compute all acquaintances with a JClark number[1] of less than 2, is that a deduction or an induction? Its a deduction isn't it. Dang! So much for that tidy juxtaposition.
[1]A JClark number is like an Erdos Number but refers to those who have collaborated with James Clark.
I'm having trouble with language though (as usual). If I write an algorithm to compute all acquaintances with a JClark number[1] of less than 2, is that a deduction or an induction? Its a deduction isn't it. Dang! So much for that tidy juxtaposition.
[1]A JClark number is like an Erdos Number but refers to those who have collaborated with James Clark.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)