Microsoft solutions framework (MSF) as a generalized methodology of the framework appoach to spatial information systems handling
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31548/zemleustriy2025.02.0%25pKeywords:
generalized methodology for SpIS handling, MSF methodology and meta-methodology, Pattern-Based Spatial Engineering (PBSE)Abstract
In the article “Framework approach as a strategy for research and design of complex spatial information systems (using the example of NGDI)” the names of its three possible interpretations are formulated. The first of them – as a specific constructive strategy for using geographic information systems and technologies (GIS&T) to manage the territory of Ukraine - considered there also. This paper explores the second interpretation of the Framework Approach – as a generalization of the methodology for SpIS handling.
The notion of “generalized methodology” is at the same “epistemological” level of the hierarchy of notions as the notion of “constructive strategy”. To consider this correspondence, the notion of “meta X” is used, where X takes the values necessary for this work. From a theoretical viewpoint, the main attention paid to the notion of “meta-research” and its component - the notion of “meta-methodology”. From a practical viewpoint, the main attention paid to the notions “methodology” and “meta-methodology”, known since the end of the last century as the Microsoft Solutions Framework (MSF, versions 1.0 – 4.0). Moreover, such understandings of “generalized methodology” selected that correspond to the notion of “meta-methodology” in the context of the Framework Approach to SpIS handling.
Paying due respect to the origin of the term “Solutions Framework (SoFr)”, the consideration of the generalized methodology (or generalization of methodologies) begins with a reminder of version 2.0 of the MSF methodology, to all versions of which the abbreviation M SoFr (Microsoft SoFr) is applied. Such a notation makes it logical to ask about the similarities between M SoFr and the previously considered X(Y) SoFr, such as GeoSF (GeoSolutions Framework) or AtlasSF (Atlas Solutions Framework). Some of these similarities discussed in the article.
At the turn of the century, the MSF 2.0 methodology consisted of six Microsoft models (solutions), some of which we used in practice: 1) enterprise architecture, 2) project team, 3) risk management, 4) application development process, 5) design process, 6) enterprise application. All of them described in the MCSD70-100 exam using the example of a hypothetical application that was relevant at that time. Then the MSF 2.0 methodology generalized, so that MSF version 4.0 included two methodologies: MSF for Agile Software Development (MSF4ASD) and MSF for CMMI Process Improvement (MSF4CMMI). There are sources in which the mentioned constructs called approaches. The following relations are valid: 1) MSF4ASD ↑ MSF 4.0, 2) MSF 4.0 ↓ MSF4CMMI. The relation ↑ is epistemological, and the relation ↓ is reductive. The ↑↓ relations are supplemented by inclusion relations: MSF 4.0 = MSF4ASD ∪ MSF4CMMI.
Updating MSF 4.0 and presenting it with a modern generalization of the methodology for SpIS handling is necessary for the possible reduction from it of currently practically useful methodologies. In particular, built using modern Microsoft products, open source products, including our “extension methodology”, as well as others. Formally, the MSF notion is not currently being developed and the methodological constructs of MSF are hypothetical, however, the phenomenon of MSF itself actually exists, is developing and is used.
The actual now MSF version in this article is interpreted as a meta-methodology, from which, by reduction (specification or specialization), it is possible to obtain the methodology for SpIS handling, necessary for practice and including actual Microsoft information technologies. The renewal of our interest to Microsoft solutions and technologies explained not only by their usefulness, but also by the more than ten-year strategy of their gradual openning by the parent (author) company. Due to this fact, by reduction (one or two) from the MSF meta-methodology, we expect to obtain our “extension methodology”. The more traditional name of the latter is Pattern-Based Spatial Engineering (PBSE) due to the fact that it is now being created as Model-Based Software Engineering. The latter will be Model-Based Systems Engineering.
Keywords: generalized methodology for SpIS handling, MSF methodology and meta-methodology, Pattern-Based Spatial Engineering (PBSE).
References
1. Dyshlyk, O., Chabaniuk, V. (2025). Karkasnyi pidkhid yak stratehiia doslidzhennia i proektuvannia skladnykh prostorovykh informatsiinykh system (na prykladi NIHD) [Framework approach as a strategy for research and design of complex spatial information systems (on the example of NGDI]. Land management, cadastre and land monitoring, 1, 41.
2. Chabaniuk, V., Dyshlyk, O., Polyvach, K., Pioro, V., Kolimasov, I., Nechyporenko, J. (2022). Golovnі kontseptualnі polozhennya stvorennya yelektronnogo derzhavnogo reєstru nerukhomoї kulturnoї spadshchini Ukraїni. Chastina 2: Protsesy. [Main Conceptual Provisions of the Creation of an Electronic State Register of Immovable Cultural Heritage of Ukraine. Part 2: Processes] Land management, cadastre and land monitoring, No. 2, 133–154. (Ukrainian, English) DOI:10.31548/zemleustriy2022.02.11
3. Polya G. (1954). Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning. Princeton University Press.
4. Shynkaruk V. I. (hol. redkol.) ta in. (2002). Filosofskyi entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk [Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary]. Institute of Philosophy named after Hryhoriy Skovoroda, NAS of Ukraine. Kyiv. Abrys, 742 p.
5. Maggino Filomena, Eds. (2024). Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, 2nd Ed., 8069 p.
6. Tsoukas Haridimos, Knudsen Christian, Eds. (2003). The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory: Meta-theoretical Perspectives. Oxford University Press, 643 p.
7. van Gigch John P. (1991). System design modeling and metamodeling. Springer, 453 p.
8. Chabaniuk Viktor. (2018). Reliatsiina kartohrafiia: Teoriia ta praktyka [Relational cartography: Theory and practice]. Kyiv. Institute of Geography of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 525. (In Ukrainian).
9. Wilson Scott F., Maples Bruce, Landgrave Tim. (1999). Analyzing Requirements and Defining Solutions Architecture. MCSD Training Kit For Exam 70-100 (MCSD Training Guide). Microsoft Press, 700 p.
10. Vyznachennia 2 i 3 MSF. [Elektronnyi resurs]. Available at: 2 - Microsoft
Solutions Framework, 3 - http://architectureportal.org/microsoft-solutions-framework.
11. Turner Michael S.V. (2006). Microsoft Solutions Framework Essentials: Building Successful Technology Solutions. Microsoft Press, 336 p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Relationship between right holders and users shall be governed by the terms of the license Creative Commons Attribution – non-commercial – Distribution On Same Conditions 4.0 international (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0):https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.uk
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
