Re: [emergency] Groups - EDIT of emergency-CAPv-1.1

[Art Botterell <acb@incident.com>]

At 11:16 AM -0800 3/7/05, Kon Wilms wrote:
>  If we were using a lookup/reference (in the form of a secondary XML 
>file) table as I had
>previously suggested, the schema would not have to be modified every
>time to include values like CBRN.

The enumerations are, in fact, a normative component of the spec, so 
I'm not sure how this would make much difference... except by 
creating new opportunities for configuration control errors.  Anyway, 
do we really want to get into recommending how folks should structure 
their implementations?

We're considering a more modular approach along those lines for EDXL, 
but that's a different context.  CAP is intended to be a lightweight 
format suited to embedded devices as well as full-functioning XML 
processors.

Anyway, a change to the enumerations is a change to the standard, so 
why not have them in the schema so validators can determine the 
validity of CAP documents?

- Art