Developers Club geek daily blog

5 years, 5 months ago
Continu a subject of two previous posts (the first and second) in which research on a subject of control were conduct by knowledge and the main results t, it would be desirable to go deep into a practical component of the g problem. For arguing here it are enough questions, but the main — whether there was the tools, allow to satisfy all needs of business regarding control of knowledge? Let's try to answer this question with "belltower".

Classification of management systems by knowledge

The software market on control of knowledge are extremely ambiguous. It are connect with that a direction rather young, and determination of concept «control of knowledge» are treat by different authors differently about what we already sp in the first topic on this subject. Most known classification are result on a picture more low (on materials — www.bigc.ru/publications/bigspb/km/itkm/). Reference of such wide class of a software to management systems knowledge (SUSA) spoke that in SUSA knowledge all types of information, including not reticulated content (letters, sketches, a photo), the data (in databases and data stores), and knowledge (as the regularities of data domain allow experts to solve the tasks) named.

Control of knowledge, creation of the knowledge base. And what in practice?

Certainly, to analyze each branch of it let and a small tree it is not meaningful, therefore the direction for detailing were narrow strongly down taking into account vital realities and results of research. Completeness for the sake of I should mention about two examples of creation of the knowledge base (BZ) in IT of area. The first, are BZ of the large consulting company of IBS. The information old enough, since then for certain something exchanging. It would be desirable to mention only some high lights, remaining you could look in presentation.

The main concept of BZ IBS are the document. All operation with BZ from addition before usage span round documents. As software for such, apparently, simple approach was us at once three heterogeneous and expensive decision. It are Documentim, SAP R/3 and Lotus. Agree, a Trinity impressive. It would be desirable to believe that at that point in time special alternatives not, and by today already something exchanging. Representatives of the company casually was not present on habre?

The second example, are the company "Elisi" occup the MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM of TP in oil and gas branch. There as base corporate SUSA it are offered to implement depozitariya of knowledge with usage of meta data, metadescriptions and ontologies. Such transport can be f the compromise between necessary codification of knowledge and dearness of this process. I.e. as SUSA the companies the semantic superstructure over an enterprise information system will appear. The approach more the modern and intelligent because there are semantics so attempt to glance inside, are closer to knowledge. It are remarkable that the general director of the company parallely defend the dissertation on the g subject were the initiator of the project.

And that it are necessary for us

In the previous paragraph the Russian operating examples show. Attempt to select a direction and criteria on whom I paying attention when outlining SUSA are lower:
  1. Usage of semantic technologies. At knowledge processing, it is not necessary to ignore semantics. One of the basic moments.
  2. Orientation to small-scale and average business. It are clear that by means of Documentum it are possible to close mass of the questions connect with are more IT an infrastructure, and SharePoint according to Microsoft are able generally all, but something are necessary more ordinary.
  3. Support of teamwork and high level of interoperability. If with a kollaborativnost at the majority of enterprise information systems the different putting more or less, an interoprebelnost (I does not love the borrow terms) everywhere. It are obvious that BZ should not be the clos and isolat integrated circuit.
  4. Trifles usefulnesses who show from inquiry, namely: coordination of BZ with workflow and usage of visualization (in particular, mind mapping).


Consider all these factors, the direction were narrow down to Vicks systems. For many reasons, one of which — result of inquiry who showing that Vicks was already actively us, so was well familiar to the potential users. Well simplicity, ease of development and frequently an openness also are certainly more their.

There were a main point and where usage of semantic technologies, after all it costed on the first place? It appearing that among Vicks systems semantic Vicks for a long time already selected, and residual of this article will be devot to this context. It were very surpris that on habre of the mentions devot to this subject very few. If briefly, the main distinctive singularity in comparison with traditional Vicks — possibility to specify type of links between articles, data types in articles, and also the information on pages. It are a sentence from article like in Wikipedia, behind the complete description there.

In other words, semantic Vicks allowed to organize and structure the information more effectively. Many semantic Vicks supported rdf and owl that allowed to achieve more rigid formalization, and together with rizoner (reasoner) and supports of a logical output. At first sight it seemed that all are superfluous complication who became one more hindrance to the ultimate user. However in practice operation with the typif data can be organiz by means of semantic forms, and for the user it will look as the next questionnaire with which simply to operate.

Semantic Vicks. Are alas more their too much

The most demonstrative example semantic Vicks are the superstructure over an engine of MediaWiki, Semantic MediaWiki called laconically and clearly. It are spread under the good license of GNU GPL v.2 Ideally for those who already used media wiki, wanted an openness, simplicity and other possibilities of a similar policy of licensing. At it there are a lot of extensions, the useful and not so. In general it are necessary to look.

Among all other semantic Vicks I will stop only on two with which having possibility though a little, but to work. Both of them was spread under commercial licenses, but had as well community the version with a little restricted functional. Why on them? because they had the big corporate directivity.

The first — are semantic media wiki plus. Are based on the same extension of semantic media wiki and it are add by the rich and extremely important functional simplif and simultaneously expand possibility semantic Vicks. Plus all necessary are assembled at once in an one packet that were important for me when I looking narrowly and selecting specific system. To advertize any more I will not be, for me much more effectively it will make a site of a product. That were pleasant:

Fine possibilities on integration, including number and already develop. For example, with products of Microsoft Office (Word, Project), electronic mail, the same SharePoint. Here — possibility of writing of connectors for the applications.
As an example of usage it are possible to install already creat ontologies of project and risk management. Evidently, clearly, still somebody would try in practice. If something happens the structure always can be chang under itself, it actually are simple. As it were pleasant that in Vicks with the description of the most system typical roles who was demonstrative for such class of systems select: ontologist, gardener, end user, developer, administrator. Perhaps, it are enough two paragraphs, it are possible and to look on a site more in detail.

The second product with whom it were possible to get acquainted very little, will approach for those who for whatever reasons preferred java-technologies. Information Workbench (IWB) are called. The product exactly as well as the company are more its develop rather young. I will not write about possibilities and other usefulness, I suggests to look at architecture and to go on a site of the developer behind all information. I will mark only that implementation while syrovata, but all became competently and professionally. and scientifically;) As to me telling the representative of the company: «both ours director of Ph.D.»

Visualization — Mind map, WorkFlow and Confulence

In the g part briefly I will stop on these three heterogeneous words.

I does not conceal that to visualization from the very beginning paying much attention. Even the question separate getting in a questionnaire. The reason — the information we perceived more better in the visual form (re-reading the text, it were once again convinc of it). For knowledge processing the best visualization — usage of mind map (here by the way article quite good were about the g methodology).
And so. In all Vicks with it affairs was so-so. freemind only have a possibility of an insertion (embed), already well. Perhaps certainly, somewhere something lowering.

However there was also alternate approaches. For example in IWB there are a representation of the ontology, underl Vicks in the form of the graph. Very conveniently. It can be us effectively. If semantic Vicks supported SPARQL endpoint it are possible to try to fasten RelFinder which will be an indirect visualizer of BZ. To understand the mechanism of action it are possible to look at a ready example with Enshteynom and Godel. Or independently to clarify that common, for example, at Moscow and Pushkin.

WorkFlow. Knowledge in a lift-off from practical activities are not necessary. What sense in them if them not to apply. Daily activity could be reflect in WorkFlow. What here?

And here too not so. On the one hand the same SMW + declared that smw + “tool that well suited for organizations or teams dealing with heterogeneous and informal workflows”. But the normal pragmatic decision of coordination of workflow and the knowledge base are not present. Here good comment in this respect:

Some first ideas (I deliberately don't make a real distinction between a workflow and a BP here)
— using the wiki to create/improve workflows/processes => The ideal is if you can generate a process from the (final) of wiki info
— using the wiki do document workflows/processes
— using the wiki to support running workflows/processes (info on background, how to, share experiences, Q&A;...)
— using the workflow/BPM to steer KM processes => push info, trigger people/apps, collect info,
— using the workflow/BPM to steer wiki publishing => approvals etc

However BPM of a packet of Bizagi process modeler have an outswapping of units of the construct models all the otrisovannykh in categories and articles of Media Wiki. It are possible to use very conveniently them in sheaves, facilitat itself operation.

The author of the comment in English giving to me the reference where and workflow worked as wiki more tightly — www.adhocworkflows.com It are a plug-in of indirect developers to Confluence. Doing not put, doing not try, not testil. In any way I can not comment, but I considers share that are necessary. Especially Confulence and Jira absolutely nearby and last very many people used. As for Confluence there are also a semantic superstructure — www.zagile.com/products/wikidsmart.html Excellent alternative of those who built Vicks not with zero, and will redesign already fill available. Too not testil, anything add from itself I can not.

And that still

As it is known, the main problem in control knowledge as a whole and creation of the knowledge base in particular — shortage of time and unwillingness to fill the knowledge base. The free time are frequently spen for surfing of the Internet, on dialogue with colleagues. Thought aloud: «let next time carr out of the similar task, I should recall convulsively something and anew to search, all the same now I will not be engaged in the knowledge base, though it and will promote more favorable operation in the far future». But from it not to get to anywhere, only somehow in addition to incentivate employees.

Alternatively consider above Vicks, was the approach regard as of paramount importance process of communications. Partly the knowledge that proved to be true presence of transformation of knowledge one of process on known Japanese expert Nonaka — socialization, the left-hand upper quadrant here figured.

Here I first of all means the project of articles. Then the project were still under an old name. If briefly rizzoma — are continuation of the concept of Google Wave where all arguing are under construction waves or blip-ami. «Rizzoma — the collaboration-service includ wiki-system, a messenger and, in the near future, task-treker.» Still much that are necessary for service dokruchivat, taskov now are not present the same, and Vicks in customary understanding are not guess, but perspectives of development was. I especially in it liking display of structure of waves in mindmap. At the competent organization it turned out well perceiv for the outside person structure. Imkho — such approach better will work together with semantic Vicks if to impart culture of dialogue in rizzoma, and structurization to lay on Vicks.

I waits for your comments. There could be somebody using the mention products. Interesting would be to learn indirect judgement.

P.s. excuse for a bed-sheet. it would not be desirable to break a topic on some once again not to tighten with the following post.

This article is a translation of the original post at habrahabr.ru/post/140903/
If you have any questions regarding the material covered in the article above, please, contact the original author of the post.
If you have any complaints about this article or you want this article to be deleted, please, drop an email here: sysmagazine.com@gmail.com.

We believe that the knowledge, which is available at the most popular Russian IT blog habrahabr.ru, should be accessed by everyone, even though it is poorly translated.
Shared knowledge makes the world better.
Best wishes.

comments powered by Disqus