RuleSpeak® beinhaltet eine Menge von Richtlinien für die Darstellung von Geschäftsregeln in prägnanter, anwenderfreundlicher Art. Es ist keine Sprache oder Syntax per se, vielmehr eine Sammlung von "Best Practices" für deutsch-sprechende Geschäftsanwender.
One common problem I see in the IT industry is the qualification of IT decisions. I talk to architects from all around the world and hear a lot of creative and innovate ways of solving problems. More often than not, what I don’t hear is more concerning. When I have asked: Why did we approach the problem in this manner? How does this align to the business? Does this fulfill the business, functional and non-functional requirements Why is this the optimal architecture? Obviously there are a lot of other questions, but to keep this concise above are some sample questions. The last question is particularly interesting. I have heard a broad range of fluffy answers such as: “trust me, I know what I am doing”, “I have been doing this for 20 years, I know how to do this”, “I am the expert of [X]”. All of these responses may be completely true but doesn’t quantify the solution. It doesn’t demonstrate that there was a process or a clear level of due diligence that was performed.
The recently coined term «Event-Driven Business Process Management» (EDBPM) is nowadays an enhancement of BPM by new concepts of Service Oriented Architecture, Event Driven Architecture, Software as a Service, Business Activity Monitoring and Complex Event Processing (CEP). In this context BPM means a software platform which provides companies the ability to model, manage, and optimize these processes for significant gain. As an independent system, CEP is a parallel running platform that analyses and processes events. The BPM- and the CEP-platform correspond via events which are produced by the BPM-workflow engine and by the – if distributed - IT services which are associated with the business process steps. Also events coming from different event sources in different forms can trigger a business process or influence the execution of a process or a service, which can result in another event. Even more, the correlation of these events in a particular context can be treated as a complex, business level event, relevant for the execution of other business processes or services. A business process – arbitrarily fine or coarse grained – can be seen as a service again and can be “choreographed” with other business processes or services, even between different enterprises and organizations.
Bei Fahndungsarbeiten greifen Behörden immer häufiger auf Web-2.0-Angebote zurück. Seit Herbst twittert auch die US-Bundespolizeibehörde FBI und bedient bislang knapp 3.300 "Follower" (Abonnenten) mit Kurznachrichten.
Social media such as Twitter are doing more harm than good by stoking fears of a swine flu pandemic, while other sites are finding ways to help, says Darryl Taft
Soziale Netzwerke wie Twitter oder Facebook, die auf einem ständigen Kommunikationsfluss basieren, können die moralischen Einstellungen ihrer Nutzer abstumpfen. Das behaupten Forscher der Universität von Süd-Kalifornien, die in den Plattformen eine Überforderung für das menschliche Gehirn orten. Besonders junge Menschen seien aufgrund eines überdurchschnittlich hohen Ausmaßes an Kommunikation gefährdet und drohen bei ständiger Nutzung auf Dauer Schaden zu nehmen. Das ständige Erhalten neuer Nachrichten und die mögliche Vielzahl an sozialen Kontakten würden zu einer "Überkommunikation" führen. Der "moralische Kompass" im Gehirn sei von den Online-Angeboten überfordert.
journalist writing about his experiences and using of and with Twitter for tracking breaking news in "near-time" and using this information for his own publicising work
Fundamentally, Web 3.0 is about using semantic technology to derive meaning from the vast accumulation of textual information out there on the Web and do something useful with it. If you want a slightly deeper dive on Web 3.0 then read What is Web 3.0 and Why Should I Care? but fundamentally it’s about semantic technology.
Pysdex uses such technology to parse information in real time for meaning, aggregating it and filtering it, and delivering it to various streamed services that it offers to its customers. The diagram below illustrates that process.
However I don't think this is the key point about agile
methods. Lack of documentation is a symptom of two much deeper
differences:
Agile methods are adaptive rather than predictive.
Engineering methods tend to try to plan out a large part of the software
process in great detail for a long span of time, this works well until
things change. So their nature is to resist change. The agile methods,
however, welcome change. They try to be processes that adapt and
thrive on change, even to the point of changing themselves.
Agile methods are people-oriented rather than
process-oriented. The goal of engineering methods is to define a
process that will work well whoever happens to be using it. Agile
methods assert that no process will ever make up the skill of the
development team, so the role of a process is to support the
development team in their work.In the following sections I'll explore these differences in
more detail, so that you can understand what an adaptive and
people-centered process is like, its benefits and drawbacks, and
whether it's something you should use: either as a developer or
customer of software.
M. zur Muehlen, M. Indulska, and K. Kittel. 19th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS 2008), Christchurch, New Zealand, Australasian Computer Society, (2008)
T. Nguyen, J. Schiefer, and A. Tjoa. DOLAP '05: Proceedings of the 8th ACM international workshop on Data warehousing and OLAP, page 77--86. New York, NY, USA, ACM, (2005)