[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm
On Jul 27, 2004, at 11:09 AM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > So: > > Grant money requires JXDM compliance and CAP is not JXDM > so compliance with JXDM is not required when implementing CAP? Keep in mind that not all implementors implement CAP to try and get grant money - that is not the goal or objective of all implementations, nor the driver. In fact, I can definitively say that at least part of the motivation of why the TC was actually started and Chartered, since I wrote it, was due to the pressure to try and reduce the development time to interoperate with other systems and the costs associated with that - to positively impact the bottom-line of a software vendor in this space, while at the same time improving the solutions available that could help save lives and assets. Not to try and land grant money. I realize that this was/is not the incentive for everyone and it may even currently be a minority in the membership today, but that view is in fact represented in the very document that started our existence and at least some % of the group today. > Public safety companies want to know. The lack of objections > does not close the requirement for compliant deliverables. > Of the documents posted, which are the Records of Authority > governing the procurement transactions? > > Len Bullard > Integraph Public Safety > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Embley [mailto:pembley@mstar.net] > Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:03 AM > To: 'Poindexter, Gary'; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm > > > Hey Gary (et al), > > Allen is correct about the fact that the CAP effort is not funded by > OJP. > Some/many (can't recall off the top of my head how many) of the efforts > utilizing CAP receive some amount of OJP funding, and I've not heard > of any > who have objected to the grant language. I know for most of those > grants > the language was the old "OJP *may* require compliance" vs. the newer > language which I believe is less vague. > > Both Ken Gill (OJP) and I have been discussing that we need to do a > better > job of reaching out to the CAP community. Your e-mail gives us reason > to do > more than talk about it, so appreciate you monitoring and reaching out > to > the CAP community. > > Also wanted to note that Art's message is correct as well. We started > from > the same base, then didn't remain as active in each other's efforts as > maybe > we should have. Nothing that can't be resolved with better > communication. > > Thanks again! > > Paul Embley > Global XML Structured Task Force Chair > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Poindexter, Gary [mailto:gary.poindexter@bearingpoint.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:34 AM > To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm > > > I believe you've missed the point. They have defined compliance in the > context of how a schema is constructed and stated that this someone > will > promote interoperability. They then require "compliance" for all OJP > funded > projects that use XML. In effect, if you don't follow their guidelines > for > constructing a schema based upon the jxdm, you are not compliant. > > gary > > -----Original Message----- > From: R. Allen Wyke [mailto:emergency-tc@earthlink.net] > Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 4:58 AM > To: Poindexter, Gary > Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm > > > There may have been CAP implementations funded by various groups, but > > the efforts of this Technical Committee at OASIS is funded by no one > > other than the members dedicating their time and any resources they so > > do choose. In short, we are an open standards committee that is not > > directed by any other group. > > Good question though - Allen > > On Jul 27, 2004, at 12:29 AM, Poindexter, Gary wrote: > >> >> Please excuse my potential ignorance, I watch this TC with interest > >> but participate sparingly. >> >> A couple assumptions: >> >> 1) EM projects are sometimes funded by the OJP. >> >> 2) The CAP 1.0 proposal is not in any way consistent with the Justice > >> XML Data Dictionary model (jxdm). I believe this was discussed at some > >> point in the past and efficiency was chosen as a higher priority than > >> the sometimes massive and inefficient schemas developed using the > >> jxdm. >> >> If these assumptions are true, members of this TC need to review and > >> comment (to OJP) on the contents of the page at > >> http://it.ojp.gov/topic.jsp?topic_id=138 and most importantly the > >> statement at the bottom of the page which reads: >> >> "All recipients of Office of Justice Programs (OJP) grants for > >> projects implementing XML technology are required to use the Global > >> Justice XML Data Model and publish all XML schemas resulting from use > >> of the Model in the Justice Standards Clearinghouse (JSC) located at > >> http://www.it.ojp.gov/jsc. This requirement is stipulated as a Special > >> Condition to their grant that is referred to as a Common Exchange > >> Standard." >> >> If my assumptions are correct, the impact of this requirement could be > >> great and negative. >> >> gary poindexter >> >> >> ********************************************************************** >> * > >> **************************** >> The information in this email is confidential and may be legally > >> privileged. Access to this email by anyone other than the intended > >> addressee is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient of > >> this message, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, > >> retention, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on > >> it is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended > >> recipient, please reply to or forward a copy of this message to the > >> sender and delete the message, any attachments, and any copies thereof > >> from your system. >> ********************************************************************** >> * > >> **************************** > > > *********************************************************************** > ***** > *********************** > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally > privileged. > Access to this email by anyone other than the intended addressee is > unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, > any > review, disclosure, copying, distribution, retention, or any action > taken or > omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be > unlawful. If > you are not the intended recipient, please reply to or forward a copy > of > this message to the sender and delete the message, any attachments, > and any > copies thereof from your system. > *********************************************************************** > ***** > *********************** > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster > of the > OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency/members/ > leave_workgro > up.php. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster > of the > OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency/members/ > leave_workgro > up.php. > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster > of the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency/members/ > leave_workgroup.php. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]