1 / 37

Multi-government Perspective: XML Web Services and the XML Collaborator for Building Federal, State, and Local Content N

2. Overview. 1. XML Web Services2. Multi-government Content Network Pilots3. XML Collaborator4. Questions and Answers5. Appendix. 3. 1. XML Web Services. 1.1 Results to Date1.2 CIOC/AIC Reorganization1.3 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)1.4 FedWeb 2002 Fall. 4. 1.1 Results to Date. XML Web Serv

adriana
Download Presentation

Multi-government Perspective: XML Web Services and the XML Collaborator for Building Federal, State, and Local Content N

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. 1 Multi-government Perspective: XML Web Services and the XML Collaborator for Building Federal, State, and Local Content Networks Brand Niemann, US EPA Kevin Williams, Blue Oxide Technologies CICO/AIC Universal Access Collaboration Workshop September 17, 2002

    2. 2 Overview 1. XML Web Services 2. Multi-government Content Network Pilots 3. XML Collaborator 4. Questions and Answers 5. Appendix

    3. 3 1. XML Web Services 1.1 Results to Date 1.2 CIOC/AIC Reorganization 1.3 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) 1.4 FedWeb 2002 Fall

    4. 4 1.1 Results to Date XML Web Services: Single: e.g., EPA’s LEPC Database. Two or more (choreograph): e.g., VoiceXML (Tellme Infrastructure) with EPA’s LEPC Database. Networks (orchestration): e.g., FedGov, Earth 911 and EPA, and Multi-government. (see Section 2). Training and pilots for several e-Gov initiatives and others (see http://130.11.44.140). Digital Talking Books and VoiceXML Applications (e.g. USDA Farm Services Agency). Additional VoiceXML applications for XML World 2002 and VoiceXML Planet (September 23-27th).

    5. 5 1.2 CIOC/AIC Reorganization CIOC Guidance (March, 2002): Undertake an initiative on Web Services: July 25th Brainstorming Session. Continuing discussions and planning. CIOC Guidance (August 15, 2002): Reorganize and reorient the AIC to include Web Services: (1) Evolve Architecture & Infrastructure Committee (AIC) to meet needs of Agencies as they implement e-Gov and Enterprise Architecture mandates; (2) Integrate OMB and CIOC architecture efforts; and (3) Increase emphasis on producing usable products for Federal agencies. Ongoing discussions, proposals, and budgeting. Expect additional guidance on September 23rd.

    6. 6 1.3 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Services are Internet-based components that perform independent computing functions (e.g. including messaging, directories, and service descriptions, and several others), but because they are based on standards, can be interconnected to provide more comprehensive business services. Web Services Activity started earlier this year to design a set of technologies fitting into the overall Web architecture* and bring Web Services to their full potential: Web Services Architecture (WSA): overall structure, individual building blocks, and relationships among components. Web Services Description (WSD): language to specify interfaces to and interactions with Web Services based on previous WSDL specification. XML Protocol (XMLP): an envelope for encapsulating XML data to be transferred in an interoperable manner. *The W3C Technical Architecture (chaired by Tim Berners-Lee) is documenting and interpreting the Web Architecture including Web Services and is talking with the industry-led Web Services Interoperability Initiative (WS-I). See Appendix for details including September 9-13th meeting highlights.

    7. 7 1.4 FedWeb 2002 Fall October 28-29, 2002, George Mason University, 3401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA (Virginia Square Metro) “Turning Web Sites into Web Services: Solutions for Government”: October 28th Tutorial: Hands On Training – XML Part I and II (Westlake) October 29th Program: Web Business Management (W3C Web Services Activity, etc.) Technical Foundations Emerging Technologies and Trends (XML, XML Web Services, E-Forms and PKI, etc.) Content Management (XML) See http://www.fedweb.org

    8. 8 2. Multi-government Content Network Pilot 2.1 Guiding Principles 2.2 Schematic 2.3 Relational and Native XML Database Technology 2.4 EPA and CDC Grants

    9. 9 2.1 Guiding Principles Use Open Standards: W3C, OASIS, etc. Use SCOTS: Standards-based Commercial Off-the-Shelf Software. Use Open Standards Process: W3C, OASIS, etc. Community vocabulary and XML documents. 2 or more successful pilot implementations. Recommendation for standardization and operationalization. Use virtual centralization of distributed content with “publish”, “find”, and “bind” or content, directory, and description, respectively.

    10. 10 2.2 Schematic: Multi-government XML Data Exchange Network Pilots

    11. 11 2.2 Schematic: Multi-government XML Data Exchange Network Pilots Explanations: The State 1 and Federal Nodes are full XML Web Services (content, directory, and description). The State 2 Node is just a content XML Web Service and relies on a centralized XML Registry/Repository/Collaborator for directory and description functions and Collaboration Tools (It could also be a Sub-State entity - city, county, business, etc.). The arrow heads indicate the principal direction of XML messages and data flows. The XML Registry/Repository/Collaborator Node provides the XML Schema and other XML documents needed to validate and document the XML data flows as well as the tools to support Collaboration. The Nodes need to be on separate Web Servers to simulate the actual operation of the Network. The Nodes will be free to use relational, native XML, and/or hybrid database technology to store and retrieve the XML data flows.

    12. 12 2.3 Relational and Native XML Database Technology

    13. 13 2.3 Relational and Native XML Database Technology

    14. 14 2.3 Relational and Native XML Database Technology “Several vendors have announced or released XML-enabled versions of their relational or object-oriented DBMS products. All of these products feature a kernel architecture that is not optimized for XML queries and information retrieval. The fragmented way in which RDBMS and ODBMS store complex data structures can lead to performance problems. While these database systems will offer some capabilities for XML storage and retrieval, they also have to carry forward a compatibility mode for all the existing customer applications. This will slow the pace of XML innovation in these systems. For optimal performance, native implementation is the only acceptable approach in the XML database arena.” Source: The XML Shockwave, pp. 15-16, SoftwareAG 2002. “Native XML servers provide the high speed search mechanisms that make it ideally suited to act as a UDDI registry and repository.” Source: Tamino-XML Server, page 16, White Paper, SoftwareAG, 2002.

    15. 15 2.4 EPA and CDC Grants Significant funding is being made available to states and tribes that will contribute and exchange of environment and public health data as follows: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are providing $1.1 billion in funding to prepare for bioterrorist attacks. EPA is providing $25 million in grants funds to participate in building the National Environmental Information Exchange Network (The Exchange Network). The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) plan to provide about $12.5 million for state pilots to develop an Environmental Health Tracking Network. See http://www.epa.gov/neengprg/2002pressrelease.html and http://www.sso.org/ecos/Asthma2/health_tracking_grants.htm

    16. 16 3. XML Collaborator 3.1 Collaboration and the XML Design Process. 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products. 3.3 Combining Collaboration and Registry. 3.4 Some Next Steps.

    17. 17 3.1 Collaboration and the XML Design Process The combination of XML and Web Services allows systems to easily interact with each other, working in concert to perform enterprise-class functions. But there are two hurdles: Collaboration: How are the XML documents and Web Services interfaces created? Registry: How are the XML documents and Web Services interfaces exposed so the collaborators can take advantage of those interfaces?

    18. 18 3.1 Collaboration and the XML Design Process

    19. 19 3.1 Collaboration and the XML Design Process Collaboration is not an insignificant task! Face-to-face meetings are an incredibly costly and time-consuming way to build collaborative networks. Tracking decisions and changes and documenting the process is a crucial task. The collaboration tool should focus on the reuse of individual data structures, rather than the specific design of XML Schema structures or Web Services interfaces as seen in the previous diagram. By abstracting the design of the elements and structures away from any particular view of those structures, the design can be easily reused.

    20. 20 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products A registry is a common location where metadata about specific data elements, structures, and/or service interfaces can be registered by those that want to share those items with others (see next slide for an XML Registry). A registry should both track the development of items and be programmatically accessible so items can be easily reused. Registry standards already exist (ISO 11179, ebXML, and UDDI) but do not provide enough information, granularity, etc. for a robust XML Registry.

    21. 21 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products

    22. 22 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products A comprehensive approach would include: All the metadata for data elements (ISO 11179), XML Schema (ebXML), and Web Services (UDDI) would draw from the same integrated and synchronized registry. Granular reuse of information design elements. Individually tracked and versioned and usable in other structures. Peer-to-Peer distributed server environments. See next three figures of centralized (single point of failure), separate (sharing difficult), and peer-to-peer (distributes responsibilities and costs) XML registries.

    23. 23 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products

    24. 24 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products

    25. 25 3.2 A Comprehensive Registry for Work Products

    26. 26 3.3 Combining Collaboration and Registry The results of the collaboration process (finalized structures and/or interfaces) are themselves published as work products in a registry. The architecture provides a core metadata tracking database and a series of XML Web Service interfaces to that information (see next slide). The features provide for: Collaboration Flexibility and ease of use Management of the design process Registry Planned enhancements in future releases See XML Collaborator: XML Design Collaboration and Registry Software, White Paper, September 2002, 11 pp.

    27. 27 3.3 Combining Collaboration and Registry

    28. 28 3.4 Some Next Steps Distribute the White Paper for review. Present to the XML.Gov Registry and Repository Team and others. Evaluate Beta Version in XML Web Services pilots for the e-Gov initiatives. Other?

    29. 29 4. Questions and Answers Use UA-EXP and/or eGovCentral? Organize offers of help from Web Services Discussion Group (IAC, FirstGov, Census, Microsoft, SoftwareAG, etc.)? Would regular meetings be useful or should we just produce the pilots? Agencies, NGOs, and vendors designate XML Web Services - e-Gov specialists for work on pilot projects? Are XML Web Services ready for e-Gov and other robust, long running applications? Other?

    30. 30 4. Questions and Answers Brand L. Niemann, Ph.D. Office of Environmental Information (MC 2822T) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 202-566-1657 niemann.brand@epa.gov http://www.sdi.gov Kevin Williams http://www.blueoxide.com RR3 Box 227 N Charles Town, WV 25414 304-724-6767 kevin@blueoxide.com

    31. 31 5. Appendix Seven good reasons for XML: 1. XML is a meta language. 2. XML is text-based and easy to read. 3. XML is ideal for structured documents. 4. XML is presentation neutral. 5. XML is multilingual 6. XML helps integration of business 7. XML is open. See http://www.softwareag.com/tamino/xml_reasons.htm

    32. 32 5. Appendix The World Wide Web …in 7 Points: 1. Universal Access 2. Semantic Web 3. Trust 4. Interoperability 5. Evolvability 6. Decentralization 7. Cooler Multimedia! See http://www.w3.org/Constortium/Points

    33. 33 5. Appendix W3C Web Services Meeting, September 9-13th: Broadened discussion in both Description and Architecture groups to compound Web Services (choreography, orchestration, and/or coordination of multiple Web Services in long-running processes). Larger scope than OASIS and other standards bodies. New schematic diagram for Web Services Architecture. Strong reliance on Roy T. Fielding’s (Chief Scientist, Day Software, and Co-founder and director, The Apache Software Foundation) Ph.D. Dissertation, “Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures”, focused on the rationale behind the design of the modern Web architecture and how it differs from other architectural styles (http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm). Life is a distributed object system. However, communication among humans is a distributed hypermedia system, where the mind's intellect, voice+gestures, eyes+ears, and imagination are all components. Roy T. Fielding, 1998.

    34. 34 5. Appendix CIOC Web Services Initiative Brainstorming Session, July 25th Priorities (top ten): 1. Provide direct support on implementing Web Services to 24 e-Gov initiatives. 2. Maintain registry of WS-related projects or efforts, to avoid duplication and promote information sharing. 3. Implement a registry of available Web Services (a “loose” registry of human-researchable information at first, but later supporting automated services location). 4. Survey existing or planned Federal Web Services, via on-line survey or via letter from CIOC to CIO’s. 5. Promote dissemination to Federal agencies of Web Services best practices (from private sector or within Government). 6. Develop a model of how Web Services should be integrated into the emerging “component-based” TRM. 7. Develop an interoperability matrix for Web Services, helping agencies spot interoperability issues between various W-S implementations. 8. Develop on-line Web Services “want ads”, where businesses, agencies or state and local governments could post requests for specific Web Services. 9. Provide on-line collaboration facility for exchange of sample business cases, templates, and other info related to Web Services. 10. Promote the rapid evolution of security functionality in Web Services standards and implementations.

    35. 35 5. Appendix Sample Web Services Working Group Meeting Agenda: Co-Chairs and Participants – Introduction, Announcements, Approval of Minutes, and Subgroup/Task Reports. Education – e.g. XML and XML Web Services Unleashed (Ron Schmelzer, lead author of recently released book from Sams Publishing). Vendor Presentation – e.g. Vultus (The Face of Web Services), Qsent (XML Directory Services), Ionic Enterprise (GML and Web Mapping Services), etc. Organization Presentation – Mitre Web Services (Dr. Joe Molitoris).

    36. 36 5. Appendix Proposed Action Plan for FY 2003 (Set limited, manageable goals with complete products deliverable within a year.)

    37. 37 5. Appendix Proposed Action Plan for FY 2003 (Set limited, manageable goals with complete products deliverable within a year.)

    38. 38 5. Appendix Proposed Action Plan for FY 2003 (Set limited, manageable goals with complete products deliverable within a year.)

More Related