Standards Harmonization Through Semantics Unification

1. Standards Harmonization Through Semantics Unification Joe Zhou Xtensible Solutions Fran Clark Arpeggio Technology, LLC Progress Software Denver, CO November 18th, 2009

2. Topics Introduction Presenters and company background Problem/Opportunity Statement The evolution of Smart Grid will require a scalable strategy and approach for standards development and adoption. Smart Grid Requires Smart Data Common Semantic Model for Smart Grid (CSM-SG) will get you there. Lessons Learned from Other Industries Summary

3. Problem / Opportunity Smart Grid initiatives present an unprecedented opportunity for the energy industry to serve its customers with a new generation of efficient and reliable products and services. Smart Grid implementations will require: Capture intelligent integration of detailed data from a large and heterogeneous group of sources Informed cooperation amongst all the actors (providers, distributors, customers, product manufacturers, 3rd part vendors, etc.) Ability to evolve rapidly as the technology, marketplace, etc. also changes. Standards-based “lingua franca “ to facilitate data exchange

4. Current Standards Current Standards State to Support Smart Grid NIST has identified a large number of existing standards needed for Smart Grid (31 for initial list and 46 for future considerations). Many of these standards are or contain data related specifications, and large overlaps exist between them. Majority of the existing standards require further enhancement to support Smart Grid needs. Existing standards address different levels of the interoperability and cover different domains with large overlaps, which presents a huge challenge for harmonization and evolution: Differing levels of maturity Overlapping areas of focus Different level of physical implementation (application vs. device)

5. New Approach Needed Standards must be harmonized in a way that Leverages a shared semantics Provides mechanisms to rapidly evolve (new versions of standards, new standards altogether) Implementation of standards for data integration need to Reflect the specific needs and innovations of the implementing organizations Retain traceable lineage to official published versions of the standards

6. The Need for a Common Semantic Model for Smart Grid A Common Semantic Model for Smart Grid will emerge to unify the information definitions at the intersection of all Smart Grid domains. Source: Microsoft Smart Energy Reference Architecture

7. Common Semantic Model for Smart Grid (CSM-SG) Semantic Model presents a singular, non-redundant view of all the business concepts and relationships between those concepts Semantic Model is used to: Map to concepts in existing concepts in existing standards – Rationalize and Harmonize Generate new standards to “fill in gaps” Provide a stable core to support the generation of new standards and new versions of existing standards By organizations to create individuated Enterprise Semantic Model (ESM)

8. Semantic Model-Driven Approach Large Scale Enterprise Integration Semantic Modeling Semantic Mapping Enterprise Model Data Services Data Services Meta-data Focus is on Semantics

9. Model-Driven Approach End-to-End Separation of Semantic/Logical Model from Physical Models needed to support integration Physical Models to represent: Published wire-format standards Legacy, Vendor APIs Organization specific interfaces based on ESM Multiple versions of each Exchange Model Modeling constructs to represent mapping between each Physical Model and the “hub” Semantic Model (CSM/SG or ESM) Unambiguous documentation of mapping rules Process, tools and methodology to generate artifacts based on the Semantic Model WSDL / XSD DDL for RDB etc. Data Services to implement integration • Enforce / leverage Semantic Model • “Makes it real” • models that are used for implementations are much more likely to stay current and useful • directly leverages investment in modeling • Standards Bodies • Validation / certification services • Implementing organizations • Validation • Transformation • Semantic Mediation

10. Model-Driven Process – End To End Requirements Design Development Maintain

11. Solution Benefits Harmonization makes Smart Grid possible Semantic Model allows for harmonization today (or soon) and evolution tomorrow Process provides governance and compliance End to end model-driven approach Reduces effort required (design, implementation and maintenance) Speeds time to market Optimally identifies and manages change

12. Complementary Processes Industry Semantic Model Enterprise Semantic Model ExchangeModel Data Services(Transformation, Mediation) Standards Process Enterprise Process

13. Lessons Learned From Other Industries Lessons Learned From Other Industries Finance (SWIFT/FIX) SWIFT and related standards – attempt to converge around ISO20022 standard SWIFT based integration implementation Insurance (ACORD) ACORD Information Model standards mapping effort ACORD based integration implementations Telecommunications (SID) SID standards development and model dissemination SID based integration implementations

14. Objective To enable communication interoperability between financial institutions, their market infrastructures and their end-user communities Major obstacle Proposed solution Numerous overlapping standardisation initiatives looking at XML financial messages: A single standardisation approach (methodology, process, repository) to be used by all financial standards initiatives MDDL, FIX, FinXML, VRXML, RIXML, XBRL, FpML, IFX, TWIST, SWIFT, RosettaNet, OAGi, ACORD, CIDX, etc. Lessons Learned: FinanceUNIFI – ISO 20022 ISO 20022 - UNIversal Financial Industry message scheme, the recipe: syntax neutral business modeling methodology syntax specific design rules industry led development/registration process financial repository on www.iso20022.org reverse engineering approach to ease coexistence UNIFI (ISO 20022) UNIFI_(ISO_20022)_v32

15. UNIFI – ISO 20022 Growth adds exponential complexity and expense… • Without common building blocks: • Point-to-point connection • Data is mapped directly from one application to another • Costly, unscalable and difficult to implement and maintain • Process, routing, rules logic needs to be coded to specific message types EDIFACT RosettaNet IFX SWIFT Proprietary format OAGi TWIST 42 interfaces = n * (n-1) Source: John Mersberg, IBM Corporation UNIFI_(ISO_20022)_v32

16. UNIFI – ISO 20022 Standardised implementation reduces cost, time to effect change and improves overall performance… • Canonical message model = • True process integration • Reduced brittleness, faster to respond to change • Shared message services – single/shared parser, message independent rules engine, etc. • Unified monitoring / audit trail EDIFACT RosettaNet IFX SWIFT Proprietary format Canonical Message Model (i.e. ISO 20022) OAGi TWIST 14 interfaces = n * 2 UNIFI aims at long term convergence, while facilitating short term coexistence… Source: John Mersberg, IBM Corporation UNIFI_(ISO_20022)_v32

17. Date Account Order All institutions have their own sets of data objects ISO standardises common data objects… Order Date …and groups them into ‘syntax-neutral’ message models, which... Date … can be ‘transformed’ in message formats in the desired syntax EDIFACT XML ISO 15022 FIX UNIFI – ISO 20022 UNIFI_(ISO_20022)_v32

18. Summary / Next Steps Smart Grid initiatives present an unprecedented opportunity that will require unprecedented interoperability. Interoperability is a journey not a destination, which requires: Harmonized Standards Mechanism for Managing Standards Evolution Common Semantic Model (Standards and Enterprise) End-to-End Model-Driven Approach to Data Integration

19. Thank You Joe Zhou Xtensible Solutions – jzhou@xtensible.net Fran Clark Progress Software – fclark@progress.com Arpeggio Technology, LLC – fclark@arpeggiotech.com