Re: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn

[Renato Iannella <renato@nicta.com.au>]

On 21 Mar 2006, at 09:20, Carl Reed OGC Account wrote:

> So, I agree that current DHS and DoD requirements are very valid  
> and those requirements must be answered by EDXL. But let's make  
> sure we remain balanced in our approach so that other communities  
> outside DoD and DHS are also fairly represented at that CAP and  
> EDXL have used well beyond.

One of the key points I raised (last year) was the proposal to use  
"real" URNs for the vocabulary terms.
This solves the problem of interoperability as the terms will be  
unique (ie global) and "well managed".
(see for example, the IETF URN Registry [1])

An example from the NAWS presentation (slide 13) shows a ValueListURN  
of "NIEM-L-DoDAF:US:SE:CA:OV1:Alerting" and some values. A better  
(global) approach would be to define this identifier as a URN, with a  
URN prefix.

If these vocabulary terms are going to be around for a long time, and  
have concrete behaviour attached, then they deserve such formal  
treatment.

Cheers...  Renato Iannella
National ICT Australia (NICTA)

[1] < http://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email and any attachments may be confidential. They may contain legally
privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy,
use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both
messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus,
data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised
amendment. This notice should not be removed.