[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency] Re: [emergency-msg] Confirmed: Thurs. 10/5 @ 4:30 ET [emergency-msg] Date/Time final HAVE review
Yes, the recommendation from the GML WG was to have the profile use the GML namespace. Carl > Using a namespace other than GML seems to me a mistake - it more or less > eliminates the utility of GML software - is it GML? > > R > > -----Original Message----- > From: creed@opengeospatial.org [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org] > Sent: October 5, 2006 5:52 AM > To: Tim Grapes > Cc: 'Tim Grapes'; 'Sukumar Dwarkanath'; 'Emergency_Mgt_Msg_SC' > Subject: [emergency] Re: [emergency-msg] Confirmed: Thurs. 10/5 @ 4:30 ET > [emergency-msg] Date/Time final HAVE review > > I will be in a meeting all afternoon. > > However, an update on the GML profile for use in OASIS. We had a meeting > of the GML Working Group at our OGC TC meetings and worked through the > definition of a schema. More work is required. However, there was the > question of how to specify the namespace. The OGC recommended way to to > use the ogc/gml namespace. There are reasons for this. But, it is possible > to decouple the GML schemas from the GML namespace if required. The > downside of this latter approach is that applications that can ingest full > GML will not recognize the GML payload being processed. This may not be an > issue for a simple GML profile. The other question from the group was > about where the schemas should reside. FYI, the OGC maintains a schema > repository. This is more an issue of who will be responsible for the long > term maintenance of the GML profile for OASIS. > > So, we need some guidance from this group. Perhaps this could be discussed > a bit today. > > Thanks and regards > > Carl > > >> All, >> >> Everyone's schedule is very tight, but the best alternative (for Sukumar >> as >> well) is Thursday, Oct. 5 (tomorrow) at 4:30 ET. >> >> >> >> The purpose is to give HAVE one final walk-through before submitting to >> the >> TC for public comment. We've discussed that we'll address Renato's >> comments >> where 'easy"; otherwise forward those comments into public comment along >> with the draft and address them there. >> >> >> >> 1-800-320-4330 >> >> 327547# >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Tim >> >> >> >> _____ >> >> From: Tim Grapes [mailto:tgrapes@evotecinc.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:28 PM >> To: Sukumar Dwarkanath >> Cc: Emergency_Mgt_Msg_SC >> Subject: [emergency-msg] Date/Time final HAVE review >> >> >> >> Hi Sukumar, >> >> >> >> I know schedules have been tough, but we want to try again to schedule >> one >> final HAVE review before submitting to TC vote and public comment. We'd >> like to walk the spec end to end, deal with any easy ones on Renato's >> comment list, and submit the remaining comments along with the draft >> into >> public comment. >> >> >> >> Everyone: Please respond about these proposed dates, and we'll schedule >> based upon that. >> >> >> >> 1) Thurs Oct. 5 4:30 ET >> >> 2) Fri Oct. 6 11:00 ET >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Tim >> >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/461 - Release Date: >> 10/2/2006 >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/461 - Release Date: >> 10/2/2006 >> >> > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]