Bruce,
thanks for taking the time to do this review. FWIW, it still seems to me that
what SEMAT's trying to achieve is pretty compatible with SPEM as a starting
point. I have not seen anything yet that appears to be a
showstopper.
I
do plan on getting more involved, particularly around formalizing SEMAT
content in a prototypical, extended version of SPEM.
Thanks,
Chris ~:|
Chris
Armstrong ~:|
President
Armstrong
Process Group, Inc.
651.491.5575
c
651.204.9297
f
6514915575@xxxxxxxxxxx cell
message
www.aprocessgroup.com
"proven practical process"
Access
APG's Introduction to Enterprise Architecture
web-based training (WBT) for no charge. Absolutely
free!
Upcoming
Events
---------------
OMG Technical Meeting
December
12-16, 2011, Santa Clara, CA
---------------
Open Group Conference
January
30-February 3, 2012, San Francisco, CA
---------------
Hello EPF
Community,
The following is a
summary of my review of the SEMAT language, including a mapping to the
SPEM/UMF constructs used by the EPF Practices library.
My conclusions are
that SPEM/UMF and SEMAT are very compatible and should be aligned.
My review does not
include the current language specification, as the SEMAT team has not yet
released it for public consumption.
Here is a summary
of the language provided by the SEMAT team (sorry for the lack of
detail).
The SEMAT core team
is focussed on evolving their own new ideas, and not on alignment with SPEM,
but I will continue to push for alignment.
In addition to
defining a language, SEMAT is also defining a set of "universals" the roughly
correspond to our work product slots. The main difference
is that
universals have state. Universal states are a way to think about project
progress. So you can talk about how the requirements are progressing,
how the architecture is progressing, etc. This is an interesting
innovation that could be useful in EPF as well.
I plan to do a
separate study of how EPF Practices could make use of universals and universal
states.
If anyone is
interested in participating in such an effort, let me know.
Also
anyone that is interested in participating in SEMAT is welcome to do
so.
Contact
Ivar
Jacobson <ivar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> to ask to
participate. If you don't get a response, you can also ask one of the
track chairs - contact information below.
*) Reviewing or contributing to the
kernel
> Contact
persons: Ian Michael Spence <ispence@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> or
Paul E. McMahon <pemcmahon@xxxxxxx>
>
> *) Reviewing or contributing to the
language
> Contact person: Michael Striewe <michael.striewe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> *) Creating or reviewing example
practices:
> Contact person: Paul E. McMahon pemcmahon@xxxxxxx
>
> *) Theory track
> Contact person: Michael
Goedicke <michael.goedicke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Bruce
MacIsaac
Manager RMC Method
Content
bmacisaa@xxxxxxxxxx
408-250-3037
(cell)
