[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency-msg] Draft schemas from the meeting
Karen,
NEVER intended the comment outs to be permanent. Took
them out so that I did not have to load all the pieces to my Validator
while building examples. The comment outs were intended to stay or at
least be fully discussed. Otherwise they would have been
deleted. We will certainly need them to determine the specific CIQ
pieces that we want to bring in.
On the Location question, I was simply trying to
encapsulate CIQ from GML. But...... I certainly see your logic. To
the logical mind, a location has an address. It simply makes sense, rather
than making them co-equals as the current lay out does. It is true,
however, that not all Locations have an Address, but that is not a problem if
CIQInformation is optional. The difficulty arises when an address is
not necessarily associated with a reliable location (e-mail address, Post
office Box, Person Name, and radio frequency are three examples). If I am
not wrong, many of these non-location "addresses" are handled
effectively CIQ. Many of these are appropriate entries in
ContactInformation as CIQInformation that is not associated with a physical
Location. So, I think that it is very necessary for us to build a
Contactinformation that addresses this fact.
So, I guess I agree with you in part. A Location
should have an optional Attribute of CIQInformation. (The updated draft
Types Schema makes it so with exactly one added line.) But
ContactInformation should be able to contain CIQInformation separately, without
any reference to a Location Element. Because.......
As I read CIQ .... It can certainly reside on its own with no reference to
any geographical location. So, I did not move the current
CIQInformation Element down underneath Location in the ContactInformationType,
because it needs the ability to stand on its own. Rather I simply put it
in both places. It can then be an element of a Contact without a Location,
an element of Contact Containing a non-CIQ Location, an element
of a Location that does use CIQ within a Contact, or an Element of a Location
that is not associated with a Contact at all.
What do you
think?
Gary A. Ham Senior Research Scientist Battelle Memorial Institute 540-288-5611 (office) 703-869-6241
(cell) "You would be surprised what you can accomplish
when you do not care who gets the credit." - Harry S.
Truman From: Karen Robinson [mailto:Karen.Robinson@nicta.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 1:07 AM To: Ham, Gary A Cc: emergency-msg@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [emergency-msg] Draft schemas from the meeting Hi Gary (&
others), The problem I see with
treating Location as just a container for GML information is that you lose the
ability to capture street addresses within the ScheduleInformation – unless you
embed them in the free-text “Description” element, which is not an optimal
solution. For example, we can no longer capture this sort of thing (from
the example in Section 3.3.1.4):
<ScheduleInformation
scheduleType="RequestedArrival">
<DateTime>2006-03-24T09:00:00+10:00</DateTime>
<Location>
<Description>Innisfail Animal
Refuge</Description>
<CIQInformation>
<xnal:Address>
<xnal:Country>
<xnal:Name>
</xnal:Country>
<xnal:AdministrativeArea>
<xnal:Name>QLD</xnal:Name>
</xnal:AdministrativeArea>
<xnal:Locality>
<xnal:Name>Innisfail</xnal:Name>
</xnal:Locality>
<xnal:Thoroughfare>
<xnal:NameElement>
<xnal:Number>27</xnal:Number>
</xnal:Thoroughfare>
<xnal:PostCode>
<xnal:Identifier>4860</xnal:Identifier>
</xnal:PostCode>
</xnal:Address>
</CIQInformation>
</Location>
</ScheduleInformation> I suppose we could
connect the ScheduleInformation and CIQInformation objects directly in the ERM
(without hanging CIQInformation off Location, as it was previously) – but to my
mind, grouping CIQ addresses under Location makes sense, because an address is
one valid way of specifying a Location (a GML Point is another,
etc…). Unless I’m mistaken,
the ContactInformation captured at the ResourceMessage level captures only
address information for the resource requester, owner, etc. – it doesn’t specify
addresses for sending resources. By the way (a question
for the whole group), is it intentional that ContactInformation is now sitting
up in the corner of the ERM by itself, not connected to anything? It is a
bit confusing, as it doesn’t show where it fits into the message
structure. I noticed that the sub-elements of ContactInformation have also
been removed from all of the message tables. The schema layout looks
fine to me – however, I would uncomment quite a few of the comments.
J Having worked
through a lot of message examples, I tend to think that most of the things that
have been removed are still needed. Thanks, Karen. From: Ham, Gary A
[mailto:hamg@BATTELLE.ORG] Karen, I agree with you on the
need for the committee to address CIQ content item specifically. And yes, I
was just looking for a "straw man" CIQ profile. But,
"Party" and "Address" fill that need for now. Are there others that the
committee wants? Should be a primary question for
Thursday. The difference between
CIQInformation and Location was that Location is (at least in my mind) the
container for the GML structure and CIQ is the structure for addressing,
party naming, etc. following the OASIS spec for such data. So, in my mind,
CIQ was not part of Location, nor was Location part of CIQInformation.
Rather both were potential parts of ContactInformationType along with Radio, and
a generic Description. The objective was to put a place in for
both standards, without having to directly mix them. It was
just my personal interpretation. I am not hard over on it, though. If
there is reason to do differently, I think the committee would be open to it. I
certainly am. Can I take it from
your comments that the rest of the schema layout is OK with you?
After the "types" schema concept was your idea, and a good one. Keep
the input rolling!!!! Thanks, R/s Gary A. Ham Senior Research Scientist Battelle Memorial Institute 540-288-5611 (office) 703-869-6241 (cell) "You would
be surprised what you can accomplish when you do not care who gets the credit."
- Harry S. Truman From: Hi
Gary, Thanks for sending the
schemas. I’m a bit confused about what you want me to do with the CIQ
information. It looks like the “CIQInformationType” type I added is still
there, just commented out. Could we just uncomment it for now and use it
“as is” until we develop a CIQ profile consisting of an appropriately restricted
subset of CIQ? Or are you asking me to actually develop the CIQ
profile? Unfortunately, I doubt that I could work out all of the potential
parts of CIQ we might need by myself – I think this is probably an activity for
the group as a whole to tackle. So far, I have identified “Party” and
“Address” as potentially useful parts of CIQ, but there must be other elements
as well. One thing that confuses
me about the latest ERM and schema is why CIQInformation has been taken out of
LocationType. Previously, CIQ Addresses were the main way used to specify
location (they are used in most if not all of the message examples). Was
there some discussion at the face-to-face surrounding
this? Regards, Karen. From: Ham, Gary A
[mailto:hamg@BATTELLE.ORG] Folks, The attached schema files represent
a completed (with clearly defined placeholders for CIQ and Location) reference
schema for RM. Based on For Karen, If you would like to
specifically add the CIQ piece to the Types Schema (and tidy as necessary) I
would appreciate it. For all, If your mail server strips
off the attached files, just respond to my email hamg@battelle.org and I will send access to
a file download capability. Respectfully, Gary A. Ham
Senior Research
Scientist Battelle Memorial
Institute 540-288-5611
(office) 703-869-6241
(cell) "You would be surprised what you can
accomplish when you do not care who gets the credit." - Harry S.
Truman
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]