nup04102010

NUP - Wout Hofman - UTwente

Struggling with eGovernment

Nationaal Uitvoering Programma

Enschede, maandag 4 oktober 2010NUP - Wout Hofman - UTwente2

Objectives

… to illustrate IT development in a complex, federated environment

… to show how minimal agreements have been realized

… to identify missing parts


Federation implies agreement on minimal…

• Interoperability:• Semantic interoperability

• shared semantics for an application area like government• choreography between two organizations• dynamic chain configuration based on service composition and internal

processes• Technical interoperability

• syntax and envelope• transport protocols

• Security and trust• at three levels:

• transport level (SSL/TLS)• end-to-end security• application level security

• identity and identity management• delegation of authority• data privacy


Agenda

1. The challenge

2. Brief history – the basis for a common architecture

3. Stakeholders – governance issues

4. Government architecture: principles, standards and operation

5. NUP Components for local governments

6. Digikoppeling – interoperability for government


IT Governance in a dynamical changing political and technical environment is the challenge!

• Federation of autonomous organizations based on their responsibilities defined by laws and regulations (Thorbecke’s house - 1848)

• democracy (first and second chamber, government, municipality elections, etc.)• government organization with responsibilities of civil servants (departments, agencies,

provinces, municipalities, waterboards)

• Thorbecke’s house implies a dilemma:• policy makers have to deal with changes imposed by democracy, which is not

stable for IT development taking years.• IT requires continuity: institutionalization with a strategy and governance

• The challenge is “to remain organized in an ever changing environment”• keywords: change, flexible, agile, adaptable• there is not yet an agreed vision of IT• rapid changes imposed by laws need to be implemented rapidly. Is IT able to adapt

rapidly?


…to innovate government in an every changing environment…..

governmentoperation and

structure

technical innovation

national politics

cultural changes

These forces have a relation with each other.

• individualization• globalization• IT as utility

• efficient, agile (small) government with lower administrative burden

• nationalization and privatization• changing laws and regulations

global challenges

• safety and security• cyber warfare• environment


Technical innovation implies that IT is becoming the 5th utility (‘cloud computing’)• Architecture as an instrument based on new paradigms

• Service oriented architecture• Event Driven Architecture• Rule based process configuration• Cloud Computing: SaaS, PaaS, IaaS

• Future Internet:• vital infrastructure• broadband• Internet of things (IPv6)• privacy, security• semantic interoperability

• Everything is ‘data’ – shift from processes to data:• ‘unstructured’ content (multimedia) versus structured data• new search algorithms, new visualization paradigms

• Smart devices

• Social computing• co-creation (e.g. in crisis management)


How did the government address these issues (history)

• 2001 Min. BZK - ‘Andere overheid’ resulting in Stichting ICTU (ICT Uitvoeringsorganisatie)• OSOS – open source and open standards• Advies Overheid – open, transparant, no wrong door• SBG – Reference data• EGEM – eGov for municipalities• RYX (to DWR)• PKIOverheid – security infrastructure• others

• 2003 establishment of eGovernment principles (‘Andere Overheid’)• 2005 initiatives of government organizations

• Manifest Group (large agencies and municipalities)• GovUnited and Dimpact (eGov functionality for municipalities)

• 2006 rapid increase of initiatives and change of naming, e.g.• PIP – Personal Internet Portal (mygov)• eProv – eGov for provinces• Overheid Antwoord – KCC, Advies Overheid, Antwoord voor

Bedrijven• RENOIR (includes architecture)• NOIV and BFS (was OSOS)• EGEM over to VNG (2010: KING)• SGGV – companies• GMV – delegation of rights (politic issues with DigiD)• etc.


History - continued

• 2006 raising GBO, now Logius – maintenance generic eGov components• DigiD• OTP• etc.

• 2008 establishing NUP (formerly National Urgency Program)• set of components for decentral governments• control: Min BZK DG DRI, coordination with VNG (and KING)• execution: ICTU/Renoir

• 2009 Digital Workspace Central Government (DWR – ‘anyplace’, ‘anytime’)controlled by DG OBR of Min BZKgoverned by the Central Government CIO (Hillenaar)• Technical infrastructure• Common workspace for civil servants of the central government

• 2010 Evaluation of NUP (Doctors van Leeuwen)

• 2011 NUP should be completed and implementedend of BZK DG DRIfuture of ICTU?function of Logius?continuity?


Overview of current ICTU programs and projects in the context of NUP


Stakeholder initiatives by central government• Min BZK is responsible for

• eGovernment implementation by local organizations (DG DRI - NUP) and central government (DG OBR))

• responsible for the GBA (persons)• Min EZ is responsible for

• central register of companies (NHR)• decreasing administrative burden for companies• location policy related to EU Service Directive

• Min VROM is responsible for several initiatives supported by new laws• a large number of registers (BAG - buildings, addresses, parcels (Cadastre))• a new permit structure (‘omgevingsvergunning’, Wabo)• a new way of registering zoning plans (new Wro)

• Min LNV intends to improve its services to primary companies• registration in NHR• delegation of rights• new service provision• increase food safety (VWA, with VROM).

• Min Fin is trying to reduce the administrative burden for companies• Single Window, AEO, permits, etc. in cooperation with VWA• tax payments, electronic invoicing, business reporting (XBRL)

• Min VWS tries to govern changes in health care• improve self assisted living (Wmo, Regelhulp)

• Min V&W: is initiating actions via RWS• improve mobility (cargo and persons)• improve modal split (cargo)


Stakeholders at agency level are faced by rapid changes due to policy decisions

• Agencies coordinate in the Manifest Group to meet these challenges

• Basically investigating cost reduction for IT development• to apply basic, stable registers for all types of laws• to re-use each others register data• to automatically relate law and IT support of that law• to apply AI type of technology for user interaction with these IT systems (e.g.

INDIGO)• to become interoperable they have to agree on semantics

• Belastingdienst for instance is looking at• automation of all types of tax declaration (‘vooringevuld’)• reduce the administrative burden and improve location policy by new

technology (Single Window, SGGV, DigiPoort)


Local governments are organized in different ways

• Municipalities (VNG/KING)• point of contact for citizens and companies (cie. Jorritsma)• rapid increase of required functionality with less budget, support for

implementing required changes (various laws like Wabo, Wmo, nWro, etc.)• Customer Contact Centers (KCC, ’14’)• shared services for small municipalities• combining forces for developing SaaS solutions (GovUnited) or mid office

software (Dimpact)• improve interoperability (StUF – Standaard Uitwisseling Formaat)

• Provinces (IPO)• committed to use NUP• political pressure to reduce the number of provinces• contact with citizens/companies only for the larger once (environmental

affairs)• ‘Waterschappen’ (Waterschapshuis)

• under pressure for merging with provinces• centralized technology development for all Waterschappen


Important developments at EU level

• European Interoperability Framework• general principles for interoperability between government organizations• DG Enterprise and Industry - IDABC Unit, in collaboration with DG Internal

Market and Services

• EU Service Directive• one point of contact for companies within a Member State to another Member

State• active by the end of 2009• implemented as a portal (www.bedrijvenloket.nl)

• EU funded programs:• STORK – identity management (https://www.eid-stork.eu/)• PEPPOL – electronic procurement (http://peppol.eu/)• SPOCS – Single Point of Contact (www.eu-spocs.eu)

• … and several other initiatives, e.g. in global trade (Single Window)


A reminder

governmentoperation and

structure

technical innovation

national politics

cultural changes global challenges

5th utility• architecture• future internet• data orientation• smart devices• social computing


Architecture was the first to consider with the objective to coordinate projects and IT changes - NORA

• 2006 – NORA version 1:• 213 pages describe the architecture• identification of components:

• multi channeling for public services• single point of entry – www.overheid.nl, personal internet page• identification numbers – BSN - PKI and eNIK (electronic identity card)• eforms

• 2007 – NORA version 2:• 283 pages• changes:

• embedding in governance structure• actualization of components• improve explanations

• 2009 – NORA version 3:• shift from individual government architecture with SOA to interoperability• ten basic principles that closely reflect NUP, supported by derived principles (2010)


NORA was applied further at various governmental levels.

• Central Government – MARIJ (resulting in departmental architectures like DIVA – DoD)

• Provinces - PETRA

• Municipalities – GEMMA

• Waterboards - WILMA


NORA - overview


10-NORA principles (political correct):

1. Apply generic components and standards2. Re-use of data already known by governments3. Assure data privacy4. Transparency (data, process, and lead times)5. Improve public service delivery by re-use of customer data6. Demand driven service delivery7. Inclusion supported by multi channeling8. Pro-active service delivery9. Define Quality of Service10.High precision and recall of public services


Core is the definition of ‘Public Service’ (NORA 3.0)

A public service relates to the execution of a public task

• Any type: • services offered to citizens and companies (permit, funding,

passport, etc.)• policy services (organizing election, defining laws, etc.)

• All services supplied by government:• municipalities, provinces, departments, etc.• agencies, health care, educational services

• All types of end-users:• citizens and companies• other governmental organizations


IT components are ….


.. and an architectural blueprint for a government organization

mid office

back office

front office Digi-

kop-peling


Another picture shows more detail (municipalities)


Why a mid office? Difference with ESBs?

• Basically issue:• back office systems are ‘closed’ systems supporting civil servants• back office systems are not constantly available (no 24x7)• data is copied to mid office

• Mid office functionality:• business processes support, workflow aligned with business processes in

back offices• service orchestration• adapters to back office systems• various data storage functionality:

• document management• geodata• product management• temporary data storage• case management (‘zaaksysteem’)


… so we have SOA, but now we have to consider new IT innovations …

• Can government make use of cloud computing or are shared service centers the optimal solution? Governance of cloud computing differs from shared service center governance

• Can government operate as a platform to citizens and companies (GaaP)?

• How to deal with social computing for e-participation?

• Can we use social computing in crisis management?

• What can open linked data contribute to political/strategic objectives?

• Is it possible to compare geographical approaches with administrative data?

• What is the impact on governance by all innovations? What is the vision for the future?

• These are addressed by:• policy makers within departments• solution providers to increase the attractiveness of their solution• government organizations that want to increase their attractiveness to citizens,

companies, tourists, etc.• universities and research institutes, research projects, etc.


A vision depends on politics. A vision will give a focus for action.

TIME

GOAL

Actions driven by strategyWhere are

we now?Silo’s

Mission: Why are we here?

Mission: Why are we here?

Values: What are our enduring principles and

beliefs?

Values: What are our enduring principles and

beliefs?

Vision: Where do we want to be in

2020?

Vision: Where do we want to be in

2020?

Strategy: How do we get there?

Strategy: How do we get there?

Citizen society

eGovernment

AndereOverheid


What is influencing a citizens society?

CitizensSociety

from government togovernance

Future Internet: to a data society

Social Computing: self controlling networks of citizens and companies

Economy: lessen administrative

burden, economize

Single Issue politics: democracy by social computing networks

A free democracy for allis the basis(inclusion)



NORA does not consider such a vision, an IT strategy and governance to achieve these changes.

• Strategic principles – guiding principles for realizing a vision

• Tactic standards define required actions for reaching these principles

• Operational solutions – all projects and programs to fulfill the tactical standards

Currently:1. Most discussion focuses on operational solutions. 2. Everyone agrees on strategic principles3. The issue is development of an agreed vision of the future

changes, based on for instance political decisions.


Strategic principles need to be formulated at policy level

1. .. to increase the quality of service2. .. to reduce the administrative burden3. .. to operate transparent4. .. to improve participation in democracy and governance5. .. to include all persons (elderly, disabled, etc.)6. .. to improve efficiency7. .. to reduce internal costs


These principles can be transformed in various tactical standards implemented by operational solutions, e.g.

• single identification• DigiD, Delegation of rights,

• data re-usability by government organizations• basic registers (GBA, BAG, NHR)• Single Window for goods flows• requires identification and authentication

• DigiD for persons• Delegation of rights• Identification for companies (not yet solved)

• transparency of operation• open (linked) data – public available data (free or against reasonable costs; local initiatives)• sharing public services (SC)• service levels – transparency of process, including deadlines (no action)

• no wrong door - access• Single Point of Contact for foreign companies• overheid.nl for persons• mijnoverheid for services and their status• DigiPoort for messaging with companies• examples of service composition, e.g. NewtoHolland, onderwijsenbijverdienen


Federation requires interoperability, security and trust, but yet we always define new systems and solutions.

• Examples:• departments: DWR• social security: DKD, Regelhulp• health care: LSP (Landelijk Schakel Punt)• permits: OmgevingsLoket• public transport: NDW, OVW• disclosure of common data (basisregisters): GOB• etc.

• Only technical components in NUP:• DigiD, DigiD Machtigingen, eHerkenning voor Bedrijven• Digikoppeling (structure for standards)• Digimelding (application)• Gemeenschappelijke ontsluiting Basisregisters (application)

• Semantics is yet to be addressed• many large projects fail (e.g. UWV-Belastingdienst)• huge development costs, different solutions that are not interoperable• several examples of inconsistency and incompleteness can be found at

https://catalogus.stelselcatalogus.nl/StelselCatalogus/WAStelselcatalogus/home?init=true

• Security and trust are driven by politics (e.g. DigiD Machtigingen), without risk assessment


Agenda

1. The challenge

2. Brief history – the basis for a common architecture

3. Stakeholders – governance issues

4. Government architecture: principles, standards and operation

5. NUP Components for local governments

6. Digikoppeling – interoperability for government


Agenda for interoperability in an open (federated) environment.

• Security and privacy

• Interoperability• technical standards (envelope: DigiKoppeling, data

structuring: StUF)• semantics and choreography (StUF? SC?)


Overview of NUPaccess,

inclusion &transparency

data re-usesemantics?

certificate

unique identification

technicalstandards

(Digipoort not mentioned)

stimulation

new solutions and systems


Access, inclusion, and transparancy

• Webrichtlijnen: accessibility of web pages to all

• Samenwerkende Catalogi: sharing references to public services

• Antwoord voor Bedrijven: disclosure of all relevant government content to companies

• MijnOverheid.nl: personal internet page

• Antwoord©:• disclosure of all relevant government

content to citizens• data transparency (metadata of web

pages, based on Dublin Core)

individual


Basisregisters


Identification and authentication - DigiD

• Three security levels:• basic: user name password• medium: user name, password, transaction code (via SMS)• high: identity card with PKI certificate

• Embedded in government portals

• Returns BSN

• Software solution: A-Select, open source software developed by Alfa&Ariss (Enschede)


A-Select infrastructure


Public Key Infrastructure for the Dutch government (PKIoverheid) - objective

• identification and authentication of customer of a service (person) or service itself

• non-repudiation (active attack)• privacy, integrity and confidentiality (passive and active attack)

• asymmetrical algorithms: private and public key• certificate: user data and public key encrypted by CSP

(Certification Service Provider)• several CSP’s with a top level Policy Authority


Delegation of authority – DigiD Machtigingen

• Creation of a central store with authorizations

• Only for Natural Persons (1)• Basic functionality like:

• create• activate• delete• retrieve• change• …

• Important issue: delegation is to support those that do not use public services over Internet

NP NP

RP RP

authorizing entity

authorizedentity

1

2

3

4


Identification and authentication for companies – eHerkenning bedrijven

NHR company

delegatedemployee

delegationregister

authenticationserver

certificationauthority

identificationserver

serviceprovider

eHerkenning infrastructureWho

requires to execute a

service with a security

level?

person identification

validatedelegation

governmentmarket


eHerkenning voor Bedrijven considers certificates for delegation of authority.

applicable to 2, 3, and 4

standards: SAML, XACML

NP NP

RP RP

authorizing entity

authorizedentity

1

2

3

4


With respect to service provision by government, a person acts

• to meet his own goals (DigiD)• to meet the goals of another person based on delegation of

authority• as an employee for a company with certain rights attached to his

role

Role: rights applicable to more than one individual


Conceptually, we distinguish 4 components

1. Mandate (MA):• authorization: delegation of authority• features: authorizing entity, authorized entity, service• variations: one time use, period, more than one service• readable for everyone, can be a physical document

2. Proof of Mandate (PMA) – statement of delegation:• proof that delegation of authority is given by authorizing to authorized entity• tamper proof• certification authorities provide the Proof• refers to the certificate used for identification (DigiD, smart card, bank card, etc.)• contains the Mandate (MA)• chain of mandates possible

3. Identity (ID):• identifying data for a person (BSN or KvK-nr) or object (e.g. computer)

4. Certificate (CERT):• official proof of identity (e.g. DigiD for citizens)• provided by trusted organization

• Role: a mandate for particular services


Proof of Mandate (PMA) - technically

• Based on PKI:• Mandate (MA) with reference to certification means for identity• enciphered by the public key of a service provider (Pk SP)

• enciphered by the secret key of the certification authority providing the Proof of Mandate (Sk CA)

• Public key of service provider can be a generic key for all public services to support service of more than one government organization

PMA=Sk CA{Pk SP{MA}}


Application – two scenario’s:

• Interactive, web access to public services

• Exchange of business documents (permit requests, tax declarations, etc.)


First scenario – interactive web access to services

1. An individual represents another individual:• offer Proof of Mandate (PMA)• in case the PMA contains and identity, a certificate (CERT) for authentication needs to

be provided; the PMA contains the type of certification that needs to be provided• example: if BSN is given, DigiD is the certificate• a PMA or CERT can be provide before actually activating the service or is provided to

validate for execution of the service

2. An individual acts for its own purposes• DigiD is currently the certificate, no PMA required


Variations for message exchange:1. Exchange of business data in

an envelope (current situation

2. Secure connection

3. A company (RP) is authorized to operate on behalf of an individual (NP)

4. There is a legal footing to authenticate the identity of an employee (em) acting on behalf of a company

5. There is a legal footprint to authenticate the identity of an employee that is authorized to execute a service delegated by a person to his employer.

envelope(business data)

https(envelope(business data))

envelope(business data, PMANP,RP)

envelope(business data,PMARP,em,CERTem)

envelop(business data, PMANP,rP,PMARP,em,CERTem)

RP Service Provider

https(envelope(business data(, PMA*(,CERT))))


A basic question would be: how do we use this mechanism?

Delegation is already arranged in many application areas:• Goods flows via ports/airports:

• permits• authorized traders, known traders, etc.• risk analysis

• Administration for SME and ZZP:• tax declarations

• Risk analysis is required to establish the mechanism to be used.• Agreement on concepts and structure like ‘Proof of Mandate’

‘Certificate’ are required.


Data privacy can be governed by agreements

• Besluit Voorschrift informatiebeveiliging rijksoverheid (VIR2007)• different access levels, e.g. access only when proof of Mandate can

be provided (limited access), highly secure, etc.• VIR – Bijzondere informatie (VIRBI)• NIR – Normenkader Informatiebeveiliging Rijksweb

• Access levels by means of roles (mandates) can be given to content

• Disclosure of content only to those that can provide the proof that they have the mandate

• Internal content: mandate linked to user name/password (what we normally call RBAC)


Digikoppeling – the technical issue of interoperability

NORA

identification and

authentication

Digikoppelingarchitecture

envelopestandards

complianceservice

ServiceRegistry

Gateway

ebMS WUS ebMS WUS


There are some organizational and technical issues.

• WUS – synchronous data exchange• ebMS – asynchronous messaging

• WUS is widely accepted, used and supported by software.• WUS is not really applied by government applications:

• most are asynchronous• asynchronous use other standards (e.g. EDI, XBRL, XML Schema over

http(s), etc.)• ebMS:

• only applied by the department of legal affairs, but• they are also going to apply WSDL (WUS?)• worldwide limited number of implementations (most EDI)• limited number of software providers support ebMS (e.g. Axway, Oracle)


Digikoppeling and other open standards like StUF

DigiKoppeling

Data dictionair and definitions (RSGB)Flows and message structures (StUF)


Basically, Digikoppeling specifies the envelope and its elements.

envelope application data


StUF framework of semantics of application data.

This won’t work, consider education that has other standards for instance for accessibility of educational material, sharing student data, etc.


How to use Digikoppeling


Digikoppeling – WUS (WSDL, UDDI, SOAP) based on WS-I Basic Profile 1.1Profile names Transport characteristics

Digikoppeling 2.0 WUS Point to point

(TLS/SSL)

Signed Encrypted Attachments

Best effort 2W-be - - Optional

End-to-end security

Best effort signed

2W-be-S - Optional

Best effort unsigned

2W-be-SE Optional

Best effort:• synchronous messaging• no particular QoS (e.g. receipt acknowledgements, duplicate detectionEnd-to-end security, based on WS-Security• best effort• identification of service consumer and message encryption


WUS standards

Standards Based on

HTTP 1.1 (RFC2616 WS-I BP 1.1

SOAP 1.1 WS-I BP 1.1

WSDL 1.1 WS-I BP 1.1

XML 1.0 (second edition) WS-I BP 1.1

XML schema (structures and data types WS-I BP 1.1

TLS 1.0 (RFC2246) WS-I BP 1.1

HTTP over TLS (RFC2818) WS-I BP 1.1

Internet X.509 PKI and CRL profile (RFC3280) PKI Overheid 1.1

SSL 3.0 WS-I Basic Security Profile 1.0

WS-Security 1.0 WS-I Basic Security Profile 1.0

WS-Addressing metadata WS-I BP 1.2

SOAP 1.1 binding for MTOM 1.0 WS-I BP 1.2


Examples of envelope elements

• wsa:To intended receiver (destination) andreply endpoint (intended receiver to

reply)• wsa:Action semantics of message (message type)• wsa:MessageID unique id. of message• wsa:RelatesTo message is relates to other with mess.

id.• wsa:ReplyTo


toepassingtoepassing

ebMS is een end-to-end messaging protocol tussen één of meer toepassingen van twee organisaties.

messagingstack

(MessageHandler)

messagingstack

(MessageHandler)

gateway

transport transport

messaging protocol

application applicationbusiness transactions(BPSS or otherwise)

organisation A organisation B

control data for internal routing

interface interface


Functionality of ebMS; each of these components adds elements to the envelope.

SOAP processing

Header processing

Header parsing

Message Packaging

SecurityServices

Reliable Messaging Service

ErrorHandling

Transport Interface

Message Service Interface


There is some specific functionality that is not in WUS or related standards

+version+mustUnderstand+CPAid+ConversationID+Service+Action+SequenceNumber+Description

MessageHeader

+PartyID+PartyReference

Party

+MessageID+Timestamp+RefToMessageID+TimeToLive

MessageData

+deliverySemantics+messageOrderSemantics#deliveryReceiptRequested

QualityOfService

1

1

1

1-To1..*

1

-From1..*

1


ebMS also has a number of profiles in Digikoppeling. It is applied for asynchronous messaging.

Profile names Transport Characteristics

OSB 1.0 & OSB 1.1 CPA creation

TLS/SSL reliable Signed Encrypted Att.

Best effort osb-be n.a. - - Optional

Reliable Messaging osb-rm - - Optional

Best effort – Signed osb-be-s n.a. - Optional

Reliable – Signed osb-rm-s - Optional

Best effort – Encrypted

osb-be-e n.a. Optional

Reliable - Encrypted osb-rm-e Optional


Finally

• History

• Architecture - NORA

• NUP and two of its components:• identification and authentication• Digikoppeling


Wout HofmanPh.D., M.Sc.

TNO Information and Communication Technology

Brasserplein 2P.O. Box 50502600 GB DelftThe Netherlands

T +31 15 285 71 29M +31 6 224 998 90F +31 15 285 73 49

[email protected]://www.linkedin.com/in/whofman

Wout HofmanPh.D., M.Sc.

TNO Information and Communication Technology

Brasserplein 2P.O. Box 50502600 GB DelftThe Netherlands

T +31 15 285 71 29M +31 6 224 998 90F +31 15 285 73 49

[email protected]://www.linkedin.com/in/whofman


Extra – defining semantics

• Starting point: independent of technical solutions (Digikoppeling, StUF, etc.)

• Important aspects:• mediation: dialogue between customer and service provider with the object to reach a

goal• execution: choreography of interactions in which the goal is reached• based on government service delivery processes

• Solutions:• government as Abstract State Machine• semantics based on reference data (basisregisters) and modeled as ontology• state transitions: pre- and post-conditions• dynamic chains of state transitions based on goals

• Similar approaches:• WSMO• OWL-S


Service Delivery processes


An overview of concepts applied in a case

Ik ben slecht ter been en wil graag een invalideparkeerplaats voor

mijn deur

1. Heeft u een rijbewijs

ja nee

2. Heeft u een auto

ja nee

eind

3. Heeft u een invalidekaart?

ja nee

4. Heeft u een parkeervergunning

ja nee

Aanvraag parkeervergunning

Aanvraag InvalidekaartAanvraag

invalideparkeerplaatsAanvraag

tegemoetkoming kosten

Persoon en adres bekend? (aanloggen via DigiD)

ja nee

and or

Citizens and companies

Life Events and themes

Activity chaining

Reference data

Activity A Activity B Activity C

Dynamic interaction models are based on chaining of post- and pre-conditons of activities

A state transition exposedas public service tocitizens and companies

pre-condition post-condition

Semantic model

User requirement expressed as real world

event

User requirement expressed as real world

event

user selection

Formulating real world events in natural language

Persons, buildings, addresses, income, etc.

That which is (intended) tohappen in the real world

Event

Activity

Concepts, associations and rules representing the state of the real world as stored by government organizations


mijn deur


ja nee

2. Heeft u een auto

ja nee

eind


ja nee


ja nee






ja nee

and or


mijn deur


ja nee

2. Heeft u een auto

ja nee

eind


ja nee


ja nee






ja nee

and or

#person identifiaction (BSN)#A-number#SoFi-number+birth date+sexe+last name+initials+surname

Person+type+year+licence plate

Moving object

#property identification+year of building+year of demolition+property status-value for taxation

Property

#Identificatiecode openbare ruimte#Identificatie woonplaats+naam openbare ruimte+type openbare ruimte

openbare ruimte

+company identification#SOFI number#addition to SOFI number+date of rise+official name

Company

+start date+end date-function-email address-phone number

Subject::labour relation

Representation of pre-defined interaction modelsGuidance to available

services.

DynamicInteractionModel


We take an architectural approach - Archimate.

Business Process

business service

application function

application service

system software

infrastructure service

Te

chn

olo

gy

App

licat

ion

Bus

ine

ss

architectural behaviour

government/public service

Digikoppeling


A public or government service is at the center. Each group represents conceptually a system.

Government services

Business transactions

Governmentorganization

Reference data(objects, subjects)

Lawsand regulations

Documentsdescribed by

mai

nta

ins

accompanied by

describ

ed b

y

uses

results in

provided by

supports


These systems are accessible by services supported by Digikoppeling. These services are implemented in pre- and post conditions and firing rules.

Government services

Business transactions

Governmentorganization

Reference data(objects, subjects)

Lawsand regulations

Documentsdescribed by

ma

inta

ins

reference data services

document services

acco

mpa

nied

by

describe

d by

uses

business transaction

services

results in

organization structure services

provided by

law and regulation services

supp

orts

government service descr. & discovery


An example – pre-condition

• Exist: instances of concepts have values that are not restricted, e.g. a person has a drivers licence or not. Only the fact that an instance for a concept exists or not needs to be expressed.

• Member: instances of a concept are member of instances of another concept, e.g. a location is in a region. Validation of this particular example might be by means of geographical coordinates of a location within those of a region.

• Set: instances of concepts have values from a discrete of a set or a subset of that set, e.g. the gender of a person has to be known as male or female.

• Range: instances of concepts are within a given range. The range is specified by its lower and upper boundaries or only an upper or a lower boundary. An example is income categorization for tax purposes. The lower and upper boundaries are of the same type as the type of the concept, e.g. if the concept is of data type ‘date and time’ with for instance a format ‘YYYYMMDDHHMM’, the lower and upper boundaries are expressed in the same type.

• Derivation: it must be possible to express instances of derived concepts, e.g. a summation of instances like the total income of a person based on income from individual jobs.

• Combinations of any of the above (‘AND’ and ‘OR’).• Each of these can be validated by a service (see before).

nup04102010

Documents

government operation

government choreography

agile small government

new laws

technical environment

dri nup

changing environment

new wro