Re: [emergency] EDXL Target Areas for device coded recipients

[Art Botterell <acb@incident.com>]

Um... there are a couple of issues here, I think.  One has to do with  
whether we need an <areaDescription> element to hold a descriptive  
string. It was omitted until now for lack of anyone asking for it,  
and I'd certainly support adding it so long as it's useful.

The other, more complicated issue has to do with the legacy of system- 
specific codes used as a shorthand for geospatial targeting.  The  
mildest case of this, of course, is the extended-FIPS codes used in  
EAS.  At least those refer to a well-known national standard (at  
least, until we get down to that optional sub-county division)... but  
they still superimpose artificial, in this case political, boundaries  
on our depictions of hazards and events.

Local alerting zones, IPZs and other site-specific schemes are even  
more problematic, since it's impractical for every receiving device  
and/or message routing system to maintain current look-ups for every  
such system everywhere.  Still, the use of such approximations...  
originally devised to accommodate the limited resolution of earlier  
targeting technologies... frequently has gotten written into  
procedures and regulations, thus freezing them in bureaucratic amber.

So I think our approach ought to be... and I believe this is what  
everyone is saying... that where administratively-designated zones  
are familiar to the audience they should be included as part of a  
target-area description, basically as a backward-compatibility  
measure... but that warning originators should (at least) perform a  
one-time computation of equivalent geospatial descriptions (polygons  
or circles) and provide those as the prescriptive geospatial targeting.

That way, as more precise targeting becomes possible, it won't be  
impeded by the legacy fixed-zone technique.  And it's in line with  
our discouragement of the use of geocodes alone in CAP.

- Art


On May 24, 2005, at 1:46 PM, Aymond, Patti wrote:

> I agree with Kon. It should be in the EDXL Distribution, as well.
>
> Patti
>
> Patti Iles Aymond, PhD
> Senior Scientist
> Bioterrorism Preparedness & Response
>
> Innovative Emergency Management, Inc.
> Managing Risk in a Complex World
>
> 8555 United Plaza Blvd.   Suite 100
> Baton Rouge, LA 70809
> (225) 952-8228 (phone)
> (225) 952-8122 (fax)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ham, Gary A [mailto:hamg@BATTELLE.ORG]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 12:40 PM
> To: Kon Wilms
> Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL Target Areas for device coded recipients
>
> You have a point, the area is not labled in EDXL Distribution like  
> it is
> in CAP.
>
> Folks?????
>
> 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
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kon Wilms [mailto:kon@datacast.biz]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 1:14 PM
> To: Ham, Gary A
> Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL Target Areas for device coded recipients
>
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> Given the current EDXL targetareas elements - circle, polygon,  
> country,
> primaryjurisdiction, secondaryjurisdiction - this code can't be mapped
> to any of those. Or am I missing something here?
>
> Cheers
> Kon
>
> On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 13:05 -0400, Ham, Gary A wrote:
>
>> The IEM folks use a similar aphanumeric label in the Area description
>> field.
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kon Wilms [mailto:kon@datacast.biz]
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 12:59 PM
>> To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>> Subject: [emergency] EDXL Target Areas for device coded recipients
>>
>>
>> All,
>>
>> Many systems make use of numeric codes for target areas, for  
>> example a
>>
>
>
>> group identifier of n character bytes (which may point to 1 or more
>> devices). What is the correct way to map this to the EDXL target  
>> area,
>>
>
>
>> or does one even exist?
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs  
> in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
> IEM CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PLEASE READ OUR NOTICE:
> http://www.ieminc.com/e_mail_confidentiality_notice.html
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs  
> in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>