D3.1 Guidelines to the Assessment of the Sustainability and Maturity of Building Blocks

D3.1 Guidelines to the assessment of the sustainability and maturity of building blocks

Draft deliverable of theSubmitted to the EC on XXX/XX/20XX

COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATION FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

ICT Policy Support Programme (ICT PSP)

Project acronym: e-SENS Task T3.1

e-SENSProject full title: Electronic Simple European Networked Services

ICT PSP call identifier: CIP-ICT-PSP-2012-6

ICT PSP main theme identifier: CIP-ICT-PSP-2012-6-4.1 Basic Cross Sector Services

Grant agreement n°: 325211

D3.1 Guidelines to the assessment of the sustainability and maturity of building blocks
Deliverable Id : / D3.1
Deliverable Name : / Guidelines to the assessment of the sustainability and maturity of building blocks
Version : / v0.9
Status : / Draft
Dissemination Level : / Public
Due date of deliverable : / M6
Actual submission date : / Date of submission to EC
Work Package : / WP3, Task 3.1
Organisation name of lead partner for this deliverable : / Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications of Estonia
Author(s): / Jaak Tepandi
Partner(s) contributing : / Task 3.2, WP3, WP5, WP6
Abstract. This e-SENS Task 3.1 deliverable ("Guidelines") is intended for assessing various types of building blocks. The Guidelines are based on the e-SENS Technical Annex v 3.0, the CAMSS methodology, ADMS, the e-SENS WP6 deliverable D6.1, suggestions from e-SENS stakeholders, standards, and other sources. The assessment procedure comprises proposal, consideration, assessment, and recommendation steps. The current document presents a procedure for assessment, criteria and information to be used in the four assessment steps, organisational aspects of assessment, and research update on already existing assessments.

History

Version / Date / Changes made / Modified by
0.2 / 30.04.2013 / D3.1 Guideline principles / Jaak Tepandi
0.3 / 13.05.2013 / Guideline principles are extended and updated to a draft Guideline, taking into account comments from Freek van Krevel, Jack Verhoosel, Marijke Salters, and Uuno Vallner / Jaak Tepandi
0.5 / 28.05.2013 / The draft Guideline criteria are elaborated, extended and updated according to suggestions from the WP3 Brussels meeting on 17.05 and teleconference on 28.05 / Jaak Tepandi
0.7 / 31.05.2013 / The draft Guideline is extended and updated throughout the text according to suggestions from T3.2 and other WP3 participants. New presentation of the assessment procedure is elaborated. Assessment criteria from different sources are merged. New template for the report has been applied. / Jaak Tepandi
0.9 / 19.07.2013 / Proposals and comments from Freek van Krevel, Jack Verhoosel, Marijke Salters, Uuno Vallner, Bertrand Grégoire, Cagatay Karabat, Anni Buhr, Klaus Vilstrup Pedersen, Sven Rostgaard Rasmussen, and other e-SENS project participants are taken into account. The Guidelines are closer aligned with the e-SENS deliverable template. The proposal information/criteria are aligned with WP6. / Jaak Tepandi

Table of Contents

Executive Summary...... 3

1Introduction...... 5

1.1Timeline of T3.1...... 5

1.2CAMSS...... 6

1.3ADMS...... 7

2A procedure for the assessment of European Building Blocks...... 8

3Proposal and Consideration Steps: Documentation of Format...... 9

3.1The objects to be assessed...... 9

3.2The proposal step...... 10

3.3The consideration step...... 11

4The Assessment Step...... 13

4.1.1.1Merging the Technical Annex and the CAMSS assessment criteria...... 13

4.2Assessment criteria based on the e-SENS Technical Annex...... 13

4.2.1Standardisation criteria...... 13

4.2.2Business need criteria...... 14

4.2.3Alignment with existing policy frameworks...... 15

4.3The CAMSS assessment criteria...... 15

5The Recommendation Step: Criteria and Classification...... 21

6Organizational aspects of assessment...... 23

6.1A questionnaire form for the assessment of European Building Blocks...... 23

6.2Dealing with current LSPs that do not comply to the criteria upfront...... 23

7Research update and input for the analysis (Task T3.1.2)...... 24

8Appendix...... 25

8.1Abbreviations and glossary...... 25

8.2References...... 25

History

Table of Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

List of Abbreviations and Glossary

Executive Summary

1Introduction

1.1Scope and objective of Guidelines

1.2Methodology of work

1.2.1CAMSS

1.2.2ADMS

1.2.3Other sources

1.3Relations to internal e-SENS environment

1.3.1Reviewing and commenting on the Guidelines

1.3.2Relations to e-SENS Work Packages

1.3.3Timeline of T3.1

1.4Structure of the document

2The Assessment Procedure and Targets

2.1The assessment procedure

2.2The targets of assessment

3Proposal and Consideration Steps: Documentation of Format

3.1The proposal step

3.1.1Complete list of proposal information/criteria

3.1.2The mandatory proposal information/criteria

3.2The consideration step

4The Assessment Step

4.1Integration of assessment criteria from various sources

4.2Standardisation criteria

4.2.1Maturity

4.2.2Openness

4.2.3Intellectual property rights

4.2.4Life cycle, maintenance, service levels, security

4.3Criteria for alignment with existing policy frameworks

4.3.1Basic alignment criteria

4.3.2Applicability

4.3.3Potential

4.4Business need criteria

4.4.1Basic business need criteria

4.4.2Market support

5The Recommendation Step: Criteria and Classification

5.1Recommendation criteria

5.2Proposed Classification

6Organizational aspects of assessment

6.1A questionnaire form for the assessment of European Building Blocks

6.2Dealing with current LSPs that do not comply to the criteria upfront

7Research update and input for the analysis

8Appendix 1

8.1References

8.2Proposal information/criteria based on CAMMS

8.3Proposal information/criteria based on WP6 deliverable D6.1

8.4The CAMSS assessment criteria

9Appendix 2 - to be removed when Deliverable is finalised

9.1The proposal step

9.1.1Proposal information/criteria based on WP6 deliverable D6.1

9.1.2Proposal information/criteria based on CAMMS

9.1.3Proposal information/criteria based on ADMS

9.1.4Proposal information/criteria based on ADMS.SW

List of Figures

Figure 1. The procedure for assessment with main stakeholders

List of Tables

Table 1. Timeline of T3.1

Table 2. The complete list of proposal information/criteria based on CAMMS, D6.1, and ADMS

Table 3. The mandatory proposal information/criteria in the recommended order of presentation

Table 4. Consideration criteria

Table 5. Assessment criteria for standardization: maturity

Table 6. Assessment criteria for standardization: openness

Table 7. Assessment criteria for standardization: intellectual property rights

Table 8. Assessment criteria for standardization: life cycle

Table 9. Assessment criteria for alignment: basic

Table 10. Assessment criteria for alignment: applicability

Table 11. Assessment criteria for alignment: potential

Table 12. Assessment criteria for business need: basic

Table 13. Assessment criteria for business need: market support

Table 14. Recommendation criteria

Table 15. Dealing with current LSPs that do not comply to the criteria upfront

Table 16. Proposal information/criteria based on CAMMS

Table 17. Appendix: the CAMMS assessment criteria

Table 18. Appendix. Proposal information/criteria based on CAMMS

List of Abbreviations and Glossary

A2A - Administration to Administration

ABB - Architecture Building Block

ADMS - Asset Description Metadata Schema

ADMS.SW - Asset Description Metadata Schema for Software

BB - Building Block, represents a (potentially re-usable) component of business, IT, or architectural capability that can be combined with other building blocks to deliver architectures and solutions (a TOGAF 9 definition)

BCSS - Basic Cross Sector Services

BOMOS - Management and Development Model for Open Standards

CAMSS - Common Assessment Method For Standards And Formal Specifications. Final Draft Revision of CAMSS. Version 1.0, March 2012

e-SENS - Electronic Simple European Networked Services

EIA - European Interoperability Architecture

EIF - European Interoperability Framework

(F)RAND - (fair,) reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms

Guidelines - Guidelines to the assessment of the sustainability and maturity of building blocks (the current document)

HBB - High Level Building Block

ISMS - information security management system

OpenBRR - Open Software Business Readiness Rating

SBB - Solution Building Block

SLA - Service Level Agreement

Target of assessment - An artifact (typically in a TOGAF 9 sense: "Artifact - an architectural work product that describes an aspect of the architecture"), submitted for assessment in the proposal step, to be assessed through the consideration, assessment, and recommendation steps

Technical Annex - e-SENS Technical Annex v3.0

TOA - See "target of assessment" (used in tables)

WP - Work Package

Executive Summary

The e-SENS project will consolidate the building blocks of the existing Large Scale Pilots, focusing strongly on the core building blocks such as eID, eDocuments, e-Delivery, semantics and e-Signatures. eSignatures, eDocuments, eDelivery, and others. The e-SENS Work Package 3 aims to present proposals for sustainablebuilding blocksthat have emerged from the Large Scale Pilots relevant to the e-SENS project. This proposal should support competitiveness, openness for future technologies, and interoperability.

The e-SENS Work Package 3 aims to present proposals for sustainablebuilding blocksthat have emerged from the Large Scale Pilots relevant to the e-SENS project. This proposal should support competitiveness, openness for future technologies, and interoperability.Presentation

Task T3.1 of the Work Package 3 supports presentation and assessment of building blocks are supported by Task T3.1 of the Work Package 3. It will be active from M1 to M6. The . Its main deliverable is ‘Guidelines to the assessment of the sustainability and maturity of building blocks’ ("Guidelines")", the current document).

The objective of Task T3.1 proposesthe Guidelines is to propose a documentation of format and defining criteria for the maturity and sustainability assessment of building blocks in close cooperation with Task 3.2,WP3, WP 5, WP 6. Task 3.1 will be active from M1 to M6.

The current version of the Guidelines builds upon existing work carried out in the European Interoperability Framework and is based on the e-SENS Technical Annex v 3.0, the CAMSS methodology (Final Draft Revision of CAMSS, Version 1.0, March 2012), the ADMS (Asset Description Metadata Schema, Specification Version 1.00), discussions with e-SENS project participants, and various other e-SENS project materials.As the CAMSS is relies on ADMS, the Guidelines also make use of ADMS.

The Guidelines are intended for assessing various types of building blocks (including architecture and solution building blocks).

Following the e-SENS Technical Annex v 3.0 and the CAMSS methodology, the current document uses the assessment processprocedure that comprises proposal, consideration, assessment, and recommendation steps as follows.

In the proposal step, an objecta target of assessment(for example, an Architecture Building Block or High level Building Block, including support artifacts such as guidelines) is provided to Task 3.2by WP 5, WP 6, or other relevant stakeholders.WP6 Architectural Board.The objects of assessment are classified under broader categories of core building blocks. These blocks may include eID, eDocuments, e-Signatures, e-Delivery, Privacy, Semantics, and others. The objecttarget of assessment is provided using the proposal criteria. The proposal criteria provide general information about the proposed target of assessment, its status, items provided for assessment, and other.
In the consideration step, consideration criteria are used before the actual assessment, to validate information received and relevance of the proposal.
In the assessment step, the criteria used are categorised under standardisation, business need, and alignment with existing policy frameworks. , and business need. Additional information will be sought from other Work Packages and external stakeholders.
In the recommendation step, recommendation criteria are applied to conclude with a classification (Discarded, Observed, Accepted, Recommended, Mandatory) of the objecttarget of assessment. This classification canwill be usedreported back to WP6 Architectural Board for usingby other Work Packages.

The Guidelines, including the sets of criteria provided, are intended for assessing various types of building blocks. During a specific assessment, relevant criteria are selected depending on the target submitted for evaluation.

The document starts with the background given in the introduction. The second section presents a procedure for assessment and an overview of the targets to be assessed, the third - the criteria for the proposal and consideration steps. Section 4 is devoted to the assessment step and criteria, section 5 - to the recommendation step. Sections 6 and 7 deal with organizational aspects of assessment and with research update on already existing assessments. The current version of the Guidelines may include subsections, questions, and comments (grouped under Appendix 9 and the 4th level Headings) to be removed from the final text.

The current version of the Guidelines has taken into account comments on the earlier versionversions from Freek van Krevel, Jack Verhoosel, Marijke Salters, Uuno Vallner, Bertrand Grégoire, Cagatay Karabat, Anni Buhr, Klaus Vilstrup Pedersen, Sven Rostgaard Rasmussen, and other e-SENS project participants. The terminology (eg, notions of a building block or an object of assessment) and structure of this document are subject to change with the feedback received.

The structure and content of the document follow as much as possible the structure and content of the final Guidelines. Each section may include subsections, questions, and comments (grouped under 4th level Headings) to be removed from the final text.

Please address feedback to Jaak Tepandi (), Uuno Vallner ().

The Guidelines is a living document that has to be updated after changes in underlying materials, due to experience gained in pilot assessments, as a result of new agreements, and other.

Please address feedback to Jaak Tepandi (), Uuno Vallner ().

1Introduction

1.1Scope and objective of Guidelines

The e-SENS project will consolidate the building blocks of the existing Large Scale Pilots, focusing strongly on the core building blocks such as eID, eSignatures, eDocuments, e-Delivery, semanticseDelivery,and e-Signaturesothers.

The e-SENS Work Package 3 aims to present proposals for sustainable building blocks that have emerged from the Large Scale Pilots relevant to the e-SENS project. This proposal should support competitiveness, openness for future technologies, and interoperability.

PresentationTask T3.1 of the Work Package 3 supports presentation and assessment of building blocks are supported by Task T3.1 of the Work Package 3. The . Its main deliverable is ‘Guidelines to the assessment of the sustainability and maturity of building blocks’ ("Guidelines")", the current document).

The objective of T3.1 proposesthe Guidelines is to propose a documentation of format and defining criteria for the maturity and sustainability assessment of building blocks in close cooperation with Task 3.2 and Work Packages 5 and 6. , WP3, WP 5, WP 6. Task 3.1 will be active from M1 to M6.

The Guidelines are intended for assessing various types of building blocks. It is a living document that has to be updated after changes in underlying materials, due to experience gained in pilot assessments, as a result of new agreements, and other.

1.2Methodology of work

In case the Guidelines also make use of ADMS. terminology (e.g. notion of a building block) depends on deliverables of other WPs, it is referred to these deliverables. For presenting the assessment guidelines, the notion of a "target of assessment" is utilized (please see the List of Abbreviations and Glossary section).

The Guidelines are intended for assessing various types of building blocks (including architecture and solution building blocks).

1.11.2.1Timeline of T3.1

According to the Technical Annex it is expected that the much of the input for T3.1 will come from T3.2, WP5, WP6, and other WPs, which may have later delivery dates than T3.1 (month 6). Therefore T3.1 needs to communicate with these tasks and WPs before they finish their work.

The task T3.1 will be active from M1 to M6. The result of this task is the Guidelines deliverable. A draft version will be ready in month 4 and the definitive version should be ready in month 6. The indicative timeline includes the following deadlines and actions.

Deadline / duration / Activities / Deliverables
1.04.2013 / Start of the task T3.1
1.04 -15.05.2013 / Development of main principles for the Guidelines. Preliminary discussions with participants. / Main principles for the Guidelines
17.05. 2013 / Discussion of the main principles with participants (Planned in Brussels) / Adjustment of main principles
May-June 2013 / Preparation and discussion of the preliminary draft of the Guidelines (planned via e-mail and / or teleconference) / Preliminary draft of the Guidelines
Beginning of July 2013 / Discussion of the preliminary draft of the Guidelines (planned in Tallinn) / Adjustment of the preliminary draft
01.07-31.07. 2013 / Preparation and discussion of the draft version of the Guidelines for discussion / Draft version of the Guidelines
01.08-30.09. 2013 / Discussion of the draft version / Final version of the Guidelines

The following sections give a brief overview of CAMMS, ADMS, and other sources used.

1.21.2.2CAMSS

In this document, the CAMSS (Final Draft Revision of CAMSS., Version 1.0, March 2012) scenarios "Assessment scenario 2 – An assessment of a formal specification for adoption by public administrations" and "Assessment scenario 3 – An assessment and selection of formal specifications for specific business needs and requirements" are taken into account.

According to assessment scenario 2, a formal specification is assessed in order to evaluate and provide a recommendation on the possible adoption of the formal specification by the public administrations. This assessment scenario can be triggered by a public administration or related external stakeholders. The outcome for this assessment scenario will be the adoption of a certain formal specification by the public administrations.

According to assessment scenario 3, a proposed set of formal specifications are assessed and evaluated in order to select and adopt the most relevant formal specification for specific business needs and requirements. If a certain business need arises and requires the adoption of a relevant formal specification, the business need should be examined to list the relevant requirements, and based upon those requirements, a selection of relevant formal specifications may be established. The outcome for this assessment scenario will be the selection and adoption of relevant formal specifications for the specific business needs and requirements.

The basic difference between scenarios 2 and 3 is availability of specific business needs and requirements in scenario 3. In case such needs and requirements are not available, preference is given to scenario 2.

1.31.2.3ADMS

The CAMMSCAMSS make use of the ADMS (Asset Description Metadata Schema). Were) - a vocabulary to describeinteroperability assets. Where possible, the current Guidelines use ADMS as well. In particular, the controlled vocabularies used during the assessment processprocedure are based on ADMS (Asset Description Metadata Schema. Specification Version 1.00. Release date 18/04/2012).

1.2.4Other sources

Annex II of the Regulation on European standardisationcomprisesrequirements for the identification of ICT technical specifications. The Joinup repository currently covers the documentation of semantic and open-source software interoperability assets.The EFIR contains interoperability assets of the Member States.