Author: administrator

  • XMLifying my site

    I’ve set out on a mission today. I want to “XML-enable” my complete site. Thanks to Anders Jacobsen‘s easy but cool fix to MovableType, my blog now offers category-based XML feeds (RDF/RSS 1.0). See the small orange icons in Domains list downscreen to the right? Feel free to use the feeds! OK, if my taxonomy made sense,they would perhaps be more useful, but that’s another issue 🙂

    The links from GotzeLinked in the right menu are the result of an XML-integration. When I update my blog, an xml feed containing the most recent additions I madein GotzeLinked are fetched and parsed (using mt-rssfeed,a MovableType plugin). I could of course have used any xml feed out there.The plugin is nice, but it doesn’t like Danish characters, which proved a problem in another blog I integrated a (Danish) feed in. Now, I know the feed (one of my own …) should encode the Danish characters somehow.

  • Sort Of A Patent

    Yesterday, and also earlier, I have posted about SOAP and the intellectual property issues around it. This issue is still open: Patent claims a problem for next web services standard. It turns out that Microsofts SOAP-patent is not the issue. There are appearently two other patents out there, belonging to WebMethods and Epicentric (Vignette) related to Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) version 1.2. CNet reports (Firm changes mind on SOAP patent) that Epicentric is now amending their statement via W3C to be royalty free.

    Even with this, and even if WebMethods does the same, where do we stand? Someone told me that Tim Berners-Lee recently listed some 30 standards with IPR-issues on W3C’s table.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if IBM have some patents in this area too – they are by far the leader in terms of getting patents.
    I just found patent 6,471,068, belonging to IBM, that may, or may not, be related to the security issue. But today, in the Register, we can read that IBM will disarm royalties over technologies it owns that are used in Web services standards, but only if other vendors with similar claims on technologies follow suit.

    Yesterday, we saw a new OASIS Open Standard coming out: SAML, Security Assertion Markup Language, an XML-based security standard for exchanging authentication and authorization information. There are IPR-issues involved with this too, BTW.

    IPR-issues are everywhere. A patent is part of the reason why I cannot have www.gøtze.dk as my domain name. Walid, Inc. owns a patent (awarded January 2001, US Patent No. 6.182.148) on multilingual Internet domain names, which apprearently is causing problems for the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), who would have been able to allow a more truly multilingual web to emerge. Now, thanks to Dr Walid’s patent, it may take another 18 years, before I can register gøtze.dk.

  • SAML

    Jon Udell talks about The RESTful SOAP meme, and refers to a great article by Mark O’Neill.

    Meanwhile, W3C is close to ratifying SOAP 1.2, but is still fighting with intellectual property rights.

  • Maturity and focus

    In yesterday’s e-Governmentat large, Alan presents an interesting thought: “The e-government targetis announced – everyone rushes to build websites and, because they are hard, few transactions get added. Websites grow exponentially, transactions arithmetically at best”. But only in the beginning: He has made a nice slide to illustrate what he means:

    Maturity according to Alan Mather

    “The trick, obviously, is to recognise early that this is going on and take steps to reduce the website count – that’s the bit where good central infrastructure, consistent look and feel, well-researched customer feedback, focused contentaudits/rationalistion, content tagging (metadata and taxonomy)and RSS-feeds come in”. Good points!

    I think Denmark is getting near the turning point, but mainly because we have already all built websites all over the place, lots of websites, and struggle to maintain them, and coordinate between them. We are today seeing a number of “mergers and acquisitions” on this front, but not (yet) at any large scale.

    So, today Register reported, UK Govt slammed for duff Web sites, about a report – commissioned by Web design outfitInteractive Bureau, London and conducted byPorter Research – which asks:”What is the point of the Prime Minister…having a site, which announces the opportunity for foreign journalists to ask him questions, yet gives no opportunity for members of the British Public to do so?” The report foundthat three quarters of all the UK government websites are in need of an overhaul, with the most widespread and aggravating fault being the presentation of information.

  • Blogging for congress

    Doonesbury

    “Weblogs are now mainstream enough that Doonesbury spent a week in October making fun of them, but as political tools they are still in beta release”, Ed Cone notes in Plugging in the disconnected voter: “Guilford County’s emergence as the campaign Weblog capital of the known universe may seem an unlikely turn of events”. Tara Sue Grubb, a 26-year-old real-estate agent and Libertarian who is running for the U.S. House of Representatives, is running a campaignblog. She’s up against Republican Howard Coble, the (outgoing) chairman of the House Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, and has confronted him on his work there. Good luck tomorrow,Tara!

  • The future

    CW360° E-business column: Real World: Web services – the future, where Atos KPMG Consulting’s Andy Tinlin offers 10 predictions for the future of web services:

    • The standards underpinning Web services will hold up.
    • The financial services, travel, energy and public sectors will be among the first to embrace Web services.
    • The US will not take its traditional lead over Europe when it comes to Web services innovation.
    • Web services will dramatically change the software market.
    • There will be a shift in the balance of power between technology suppliers and their customers, in favour of the users.
    • Web services will become the basic building block of technology and business infrastructures.
    • Security issues – particularly personal privacy, authentication and data ownership – will rise up the corporate agenda.
    • Web services will boost broadband adoption.
    • We will see a growing demand for improved knowledge management, data storage and data retrieval systems.
    • As Web services mature, they will bring new organisational models, including the much-discussed “virtual organisation”.

    Interesting predictions. Most are correct, I think.

  • Choice and clutter

    Now, what does CompTIA say to this, I wonder? This Reuters story made its rounds various places (Infoworld: E-government plan aims to cut software clutter, ZDNet: Government plans big software shakeup.

  • Show Me the Measures!

    The report Creating a Performance-Based Electronic Government: Fiscal Year 2002 Progress, subtitled The State-of-the-Practice on How e-Government Initiatives in Federal Agencies are Progressing Toward Achieving Cost Efficiencies and Improved Program Performance and published by a consortium of US organisations, led by the private think tank the Performance Institute finds that:

    The general inability of most agencies to effectively measure their e-government performance may ultimately thwart the initial gains made in the e-government arena. Of the $48 billion spent on information technology in FY 2002, this survey indicates that most of those expenditures were not justified by mission-aligned performance measures. This practice represents a “high risk” business practice that could result in failed IT projects and losses to the taxpayer.

    The survey found a number of common themes and pinpoints ten key issues:

    1. The administration and the Office of Management and Budget are cited for their strong leadership of e-Government initiatives, though some improvements are needed

    2. Agencies generally fail to use mission-aligned IT performance measures to justify, manage and evaluate the success of e-Government

    3. Agencies need to become more creative and willing to “blow up” old program structures with technology

    4. Non-governmental intermediaries are providing greater opportunities to borrow rather than build an e-Government solution

    5. E-Government is increasingly focusing on the citizen again, but not all e-Government initiatives are “Citizen-Centered”

    6. CIO’s are assuming an appropriate role of “enabler” of agency business processes and are more integrated with the rest of the agency’s leadership

    7. More program managers are playing leadership roles in e-Government, but more needs to be done to engage all program managers in e-Government leadership roles

    8. Excellent cross-agency coordination is seen in the priority e-Government initiatives, but stove-piped systems and processes remain an obstacle to an integrated e-Government

    9. The Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) is recognized as the necessary, but missing scaffolding for all agency e-Government initiatives

    10. Establishing clear priorities is paying off in generating attention to and sufficient funding for key e-Government initiatives

    The Project Recommendations are:
    · Supplement the PMA e-Government Scorecard
    · Continue to Set Guidelines While Encouraging Flexibility
    · Integrate IT Performance Measures with Other Agency Performance Measures as Part of a Single Strategic Management Approach
    · Integrate Selection of Performance Measures with the Agency’s Capital Plan and Information Technology Investment Management (ITIM)Model
    · Focus on the Vital Few Measures of e-Government Performance
    · Imperfect Performance Information is Better than No Performance Information
    · Don’t Let Lack of Baseline Information Deter Measurement Approaches
    · Agencies Should Align e-Government Measurement Initiatives with Efforts to Improve Financial Management
    · Expanded Emphasis by OMB on IT Performance Measures in Budget Justifications
    · Harness the Power of Competition by Tasking Multiple Teams with a Common Challenge
    · OMB Should Continue its Measurement of Common Programs and Expand its Common Measurement Approach to Include Common Business Processes
    · Agencies and OMB Provide Room for Innovation by Encouraging Small, Scaleable and Inter-Operable Pilot Applications of e-Government Ideas

    Alan Mather has a good comment on the report: “But what are people doing about it in government? The silo-based initiatives have been there forever and continue to proliferate. Only if we put strong controls in to prevent decisions being made on IT projects by silo can we hope to address the issue … and couple that with an architecture that allows modules to be developed throughout government by whoever has the expertise and need, but that can be plugged in and made available to all.”

    Alan is right. As I see it, scorecards and everything are good, but what’s important is their usages. If someone gets yellow or red, it must have consequences. That is however not the same as enforcing an practice where the heads are rolling. But a bit of good old governance and strong, but fair, control is needed to prevent that silos and ivory towers continue to proliferate.

    More coverage:
    FCW: Report sets e-gov measuring stick
    GovExec: Report praises federal e-gov efforts, but urges agencies to measure results

  • CompTIA chose Denmark

    The CompTIA-led Initiative for Software Choice in a press announcement Urges Danish Government To Avoid Mandatory Software Preferences. The press announcement was disseminated in Danish to the Danish press on Wedensday, I learned today (I don’t think anyone picked it up). Hugo Lueders, European Director for the Initiative for Software Choice, says:

    “The ISC respectfully asks that, as Denmark moves forward, it not reduce software choice under the guise of increasing it.”

  • open source in the Danish government

    Computerworld Online writes about our open source conference under the headline “Ideologisk strid om open source”, Ideological battle about open source.

    There were some 320 people signed up, almost all of whom showed up. For a national conference in a small country like Denmark, even 100 participants would be considered many, so a foregone conclusion is that this is an important issue.

    The debates at the conference proved this. There are a number of conclusions to draw, but I found one particularly interesting: open source and open standards must and will go hand in hand. And, yes, there is a democratic perspective at stake here.