dohertj2/3yearplan
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Finalize digital-twin scope as two ACL-based patterns

Browse Source 
Plan's digital-twin scope is now exactly (1) environment-lifecycle
promotion via ACL flip on write authority and (2) safe read-only
consumption for KPI / monitoring systems — both delivered by
already-committed architecture. Removes the meeting-prep brief and the
management-delivered use-cases source document; canonical model and
state vocabulary stand as pillar-2 work on their own.
This commit is contained in:
Joseph Doherty
2026-04-24 14:13:10 -04:00
parent c8d7bf37de
commit 22a86974f6
11 changed files with 59 additions and 303 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
outputs/presentation-spec.md
View File

@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ If `document-skills:pptx` cannot render a requested layout:
|---|---|
| **Layout** | 2-column content (fallback: single column with horizontal rule) |
| **Source** | [`../goal-state.md`](../goal-state.md) → **Strategic Considerations (Adjacent Asks)** |
| **Population** | **Left column — Digital Twin:** 4 bullets: (1) Management ask, not a committed workstream; (2) Plan shaped to serve if it materializes (OtOpcUa, Redpanda, Snowflake); (3) 8 clarification questions + 4-bucket decision framework ready; (4) Next: schedule management conversation — brief at `goal-state/digital-twin-management-brief.md`. **Right column — BOBJ → Power BI:** 4 bullets: (1) In-flight reporting initiative, not owned by this plan; (2) Three consumption paths analyzed (Snowflake dbt / Historian direct / both); (3) Recommended position: Path C — hybrid, with Path A as strategic direction; (4) Next: schedule coordination conversation with reporting team — 8 questions ready in `goal-state.md`. |
| **Population** | **Left column — Digital twin (scope: two access-control patterns):** 4 bullets: (1) Scope is definitive — not a committed workstream, not a new component; (2) Pattern 1 — environment-lifecycle promotion without reconfiguration (ACL flip on write authority); (3) Pattern 2 — safe read-only consumption for KPI / monitoring systems (structural zero-write-path guarantee); (4) Both patterns are delivered by already-committed architecture (OtOpcUa ACL model + canonical model + single-connection-per-equipment). **Right column — BOBJ → Power BI:** 4 bullets: (1) In-flight reporting initiative, not owned by this plan; (2) Three consumption paths analyzed (Snowflake dbt / Historian direct / both); (3) Recommended position: Path C — hybrid, with Path A as strategic direction; (4) Next: schedule coordination conversation with reporting team — 8 questions ready in `goal-state.md`. |
## Slide 17 — Non-Goals
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ If `document-skills:pptx` cannot render a requested layout:
|---|---|
| **Layout** | Content (bulleted) |
| **Source** | [`../status.md`](../status.md) → **Top pending items** + inferred from [`../roadmap.md`](../roadmap.md) → Year 1 |
| **Population** | 5 bullets: (1) Sponsor confirmation + Year 1 funding commitment; (2) Named owners for each of the 7 workstreams (build team alignment); (3) Digital Twin management conversation — schedule (see brief); (4) Power BI coordination conversation with reporting team — schedule; (5) Equipment protocol survey owner named (Q1 Year 1 prerequisite for OtOpcUa core driver library). |
| **Population** | 4 bullets: (1) Sponsor confirmation + Year 1 funding commitment; (2) Named owners for each of the 7 workstreams (build team alignment); (3) Power BI coordination conversation with reporting team — schedule; (4) UNS hierarchy snapshot walk owner named (Q1–Q2 Year 1 prerequisite for canonical model v1 publication). |
| **Notes** | This is the closer slide. Each bullet should be a discrete ask with a clear "who needs to do what" so the audience leaves with action. |
---