[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [emergency] Re: [CAP] NOAA Undermining International Standards?
Since I my personal experience doesn't validate the predictable effects, although that may in fact be the practical outcome, I can't be part of the we that doesn't "stand for NOAA ..." especially since I am willing to extend the benefit of the doubt based on what Herb said on the record. I don't think it serves our purposes to dig our heels in on what is, after all, an optional feature at this point. However, showing a willingness to bring the press in if intentions don't match results is certainly an option I would keep handy. Also, it sounded to me like a negative OAT report in regard to non-implementation of "instructions" was certainly in order, also for the record. Regards, Rex At 10:07 AM -0700 6/2/06, Art Botterell wrote: >Friends - > >Apparently I've failed to sensitize NOAA to the impact of their >choices beyond their own organizational and national borders. Much >more is as stake here than just "visibility." > >On Jun 2, 2006, at 6/2/06 7:33 AM, Herbert White wrote: >>The planned HazCollect Initial Operating Capability (IOC) is just >>the first step in the process. NOAA's intent is to fully support >>the CAP "Instruction" element. > >The problem is that these terms... "operational acceptance test" and >"initial operating capacity"... mean precisely what they say. The >"OAT" isn't just some mid-point correction in an ongoing development >process. It marks the acceptance of an operational product. It is, >for all intents and purposes, a functional nationwide rollout of an >"operating capacity" that even Herb admits is incomplete. > >For most of a year now I've been asking Herb and others to specify >when those flaws would be fixed, if not prior to the initial >rollout. He's been unable to do so, and rightly so, because there's >no guarantee he'll ever get the funds to make changes once an >"initial operating capacity" is accepted. (I think we all know that >there's nothing as permanent in government as a "temporary" >structure.) So... with all respect to Herb personally... I think we >need to recognize that such general statements of intent are >well-meaning but ultimately empty, and to focus on what's actually >about to be deployed. > >What will be some of the predictable effects if HazCollect is >deployed and accepted in its current form? > >1) Existing and developing providers of warning and emergency >information systems will be shut out of the system for lack of an >open interface in the foreseeable future. > >2) Emergency managers will be pressured to install the DMIS toolkit >on their already cluttered desktops as the only way to get access to >NWS warning assets. > >3) The market for non-NWS warning systems and products will be >chilled, since nobody with a full CAP implementation will be able to >guarantee compatibility with HazCollect. > >4) Many system developers in the U.S. and abroad will feel pressure >to "dumb down" their CAP implementations to match the HazCollect >model rather than try to support both. > >5) Ironically, other system developers (as we've seen in this >discussion) will take NOAA's intransigence and go-it-alone approach >as a reason not to bother implementing standards at all. > >6) Ultimately, the credibility of the standards process will be >eroded by the example of a huge U.S. federal agency overriding the >standard for their own internal convenience. > >Let's be clear here... it would be entirely possible for NOAA to >accommodate its internal back-compatibility issues internally, >without projecting them out to the user interface. And both NOAA >and Battelle have had plenty of time to make the necessary changes, >during a development schedule that's already slipped numerous >deadlines and waived a number of original specifications. > >The only reason these problems persist is that NOAA and Battelle >have chosen not to fix them. We must not stand for NOAA putting a >flawed HazCollect "initial operating capacity" online until they are. > >- Art > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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 -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-849-2309
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]