Re: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm

[R. Allen Wyke <emergency-tc@earthlink.net>]

Agreed 100%.

Oh, and while I am thinking about it. When I say I "wrote the charter", 
I just mean that I literally was the one that put it on paper. I was 
the Editor, just as Art was the Editor of the CAP spec. Not meaning 
that I came up with it all - but I had to understand it to write it 
down. Just wanting to clarify.

On Jul 27, 2004, at 3:37 PM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> Right.  My inquiry was to determine when coming from a requirement
> that cites JXDM, what governs CAP and to note the problem of record
> of authority citations that are not explicit enough to determine
> where conflicts are resolved.  If I were a television station 
> attempting
> to procure a CAP compliant application, I might not care about JXDM.
> On the other hand, I might if a source of my CAP data is the local
> 911 dispatch center directly or through an intermediary such as the
> local police department.  It is the overlaps in the information
> ecosystems that give us fits when procuring or implementing 
> technologies.
> When someone uncovers an umbrella requirement such as that Gary
> noted, it turns into full blown apoplexy and someone finds me on
> the floor a day later.
>
> Grant monies are just one way that federal power is exercised over
> local agencies. I won't get into Memoranda of Agreements
> that require new subsystems to be implemented. :-)
>
> len
>
>
> From: R. Allen Wyke [mailto:emergency-tc@earthlink.net]
>
> 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.
>