Talk:Open systems architecture

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This page was proposed for deletion by Steve Quinn (talk · contribs) on 15 April 2020.

Blob of text and links

This article is a blob of text that could stand some structuring. The links also don't always elucidate what is being discussed.

The OSI model article is pretty good. I almost think that this article would be better if it was shorter and it pointed more clearly to the OSI model article. Volfy 01:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Does this article have anything that isn't in existing articles? Would there be any loss of information if this was redirected to OSI model? EiE 19:41, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

afrappacino.wordpress.com 199.119.233.154 (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Open Services Architecture

Isn't this the result of a misspelling of OSA? What is the difference with Open Services Architecture (which is there renamed as Open System Architecture? All this is confusing.

USA MoD/DoD refer to OSA

Reference: Open Systems Architecture Contract Guidebook for Program Managers, Version 1.1, May 2013, URL: https://acc.dau.mil/osaguidebook

"Open Systems Architecture" is not "Open Services Architecture" or "Services Oriented Architecture." The word "Open" as a proper noun has, in telecommunications, come to mean infrastructure integration [AKA: Internet] and information interoperability [AKA: NetCentric, XML, UML ...] for the purpose of providing nexus-generation information services [AI for/of CMS, information management, digital libraries, knowledge management, business process and workflow ...].

To get there IMO the nexus-generation information services (NexGIS) requires "Open" applied to standards, protocols, metadata, data schema ... and "Open" competition business models. IOW: The legacy proprietary business model is not suitable for future technology information, information sharing, collaborative synergistic communities, and information/systems lifecycle logistics and sustainment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.153.24.155 (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Made more generic

In light of my dePROD I've done a little to make the article more specific and stopping its specific tie to telecommunications. I believe this widened scope allows for easier establishment of notability. I've kludged a little restructure to help the article on its way but I'd expect my start to be completely worked over in the course of time. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]