JT Open and the Future of PLM 2.0

by Oleg on August 29, 2011 · 4 comments

Despite the fact “PLM 2.0″ was first articulated by Dassault back in 2006, I think, the term itself has some rights for expanded live beyond DS V6 platform. In my blog last week I discussed some aspects of comparison between PLM 2.0 and Web 2.0. One of the most important conclusions, also mentioned in the comments, were about “openness”. Actually, the conversation about openness is always dangerous in CAD/PLM domain. The vendors’ walled gardens provide significant barriers to develop solutions for heterogeneous enterprise environment.

During the weekend, I had a chance to read Design News article – SpaceClaim Stakes Manufacturing Claim. Have a read and make your opinion. SpaceClaim is clearly one of the youngest representatives of CAD vendors. However, what specially caught my attention was a comment made by Blake Courter about JT Open:

Another core area Courter emphasized in this new release was interoperability — a critical requirement, he said, for making in roads in the manufacturing production space, particularly in the automotive sector. In this vein, SpaceClaim built on its backing of Siemens PLM Software’s JT Open technology with the new release’s support for semantic Product Manufacturing Information (PMI). This means SpaceClaim users can leverage JT data in a lightweight format, or they can work with richer, more associative information, including meta data and PMI.

Courter applauded Siemens PLM Software’s efforts around JT Open, particularly as far as the format has made inroads into the automotive sector. “Kudos to Siemens for creating a level playing field and making a neutral format for delivering the goods,” he said. “The JT Open guys have done the right thing going after ISO certification and paralleling other standards where they can.” SpaceClaim is putting its money where its mouth is, Courter said, by becoming a JTOpen and ProSTEP iViP member.

Blake’s comments made me think about future potential paths of JT Open as a potential enabling technology for PLM 2.0. As you remember from the history of Web, some key technological elements made a significant contribution to the development of Web 2.0. The famous LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP) was one of the key elements. Bundle together with AJAX and development of the blogs and wiki platform it enabled live people involvement into the broader development of web content.

One of the biggest problems of PLM these days is the ability of PLM applications to proliferate inside of organizations upstream and downstream. PLM vendors developed multiple exchange formats, and as it seems to me, stack in their transition to the agreement. What can move things forward is some business innovation in this space? Open Source is one of them. What if the technological leader such as Siemens PLM will release JT Open formats and tools under one of the possible open source licenses? Does it sound crazy? I’m not sure. It will allow to remove all barriers to proliferate data and processes downstream in organizations and boost usage of JT Open by other CAD and PLM players.

What is my conclusion? For a long period of time, many ideas were considered as crazy of impossible for implementation. However, for the last decade, we’ve seen already some very interesting industry and technological moves. Will JT Open become another one? Time will show. What is your take? Speak your mind.

Best, Oleg

Share
  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidsherburne David G Sherburne

    This is a huge opportunity to show leadership in the industry as JT is a strength for Siemens. We can collaborate with suppliers via neutral formats today but imagine if we could collaborate during the work in process phases freely between suppliers and design third parties and have JT available across multiple CAD platforms and be able to freely take in and process them with out loss of certain information. I think the opportunities are exciting and really would change the business dynamic inside a company. I think it would bust the status quo and Siemens would benefit because it would have the ability to drive the market and also add value added functionality in both their PLM and CAD offerings. I have always been impressed with the JT possibilities, Siemens is just and example here that I happen to be familiar with. Others maybe positioned well to do the same thing.

  • beyondplm

    David, I think, Siemens PLM folks are aware about that. The most critical piece is how it will benefit from this step in order to convince SPLM for this step. This is almost “one-way-ticket”. At the end of the day- SPLM is a business for profit. -Oleg

  • A. Chase Turner

    JTOpen is an excellent, open standard … with one noted concern : the inclusion of PLMXML.

    Has anyone examined the volume of CDATA inserted in the PLMXML structures by various vendors?   CDATA is a part of the XML markup specification — so, it is there in PLMXML.   Vendors typically use CDATA to insert proprietary binary data (that looks like jumbled characters in the XML) that benefits their proprietary systems only.  

    In other words, when you see an open standard that includes an option for XML, and that XML contains lots of CDATA holding binary blobs, that is a head's up for the following experiment : *block* the CDATA attributes in that JTOpen file and see how well upstream and downstream tools respond.  Failure to operate without CDATA confirms the “open standard” data file is not really an open standard … because the binary contents of that CDATA holds some magic, unpublished information.  At that point, the IT security guys should be notified because CDATA can hold **anything**, including information that should not leak out of one organization to another.  Problem is, the vendor is likely not to want to disclose the contents of what is in that binary blob as it is proprietary….

  • beyondplm

    Thanks for this comment! I completely agree. This is my usual concern about XML and openness. The fact you can “decode” format doesn't mean a lot when you have proprietary inclusions that also can be encrypted. The future development of formats needs to include the option for data to be self-described. Here is one of the examples – schema.org. Not much related to PLM, but presents a way to “describe” what is on HTML page to help crawler to process data. Just an idea. Best, Oleg

Previous post:

Next post: