CAP 1.1 Standard and ITU-T Recommendation - TC Task 2 - References

[Elysa Jones <ejones@warningsystems.com>]

Hey Rex,  Thanks so much for having a look at the 
references.  Note, I have changed this thread to 
be the Task 2 - References discussion. Elysa

At 10:21 AM 4/26/2007, Rex Brooks wrote:
>Hi Elysa, All,
>
>The best I can do is to look at 2 as much as I 
>am able. I am in the last all-day face-to-face 
>SOA-RA meeting via teleconference today and I 
>have another meeting either late today (4:00 
>p.m. my time) or tomorrow morning, so Friday afternoon-evening is best for me.
>
>Cheers,
>Rex
>
>At 9:12 AM -0500 4/26/07, Elysa Jones wrote:
>>Dear TC Members,
>>
>>As we were busy with our face to face meeting 
>>last week the ITU folks were busy working on 
>>integrating our CAP 1.1 Standard into their 
>>format and process.  They produced two 
>>recommendations that are attached for your review.
>>
>>The first is to be an exact representation of 
>>our existing CAP 1.1 Standard in the ITU 
>>Recommendation format.  They were required by 
>>their guidelines and process to make changes to 
>>some of the normative references we 
>>used.  Other than that it is supposed to be a 
>>match.  The second attachment is a 
>>recommendation for the addition of ASN.1 encoding.
>>
>>The ITU team has requested that we respond by 
>>May 1 on these recommendations.  I have been 
>>working with OASIS Staff to consider how to 
>>move forward as expeditiously as 
>>possible.  Different members of the staff are 
>>working to ensure we follow the proper IPR, 
>>process, etc.  For example, ASN.1 needs to be 
>>"contributed" to OASIS for this purpose.
>>
>>If we agree as a TC that this is indeed a 
>>complete and correct description of our 
>>Standard and we agree to accept the ASN.1 
>>encoding that it is technically equivalent to 
>>our Standard, and therefore non-substantive, we 
>>could process this document through the OASIS 
>>process as an errata.  This appears to be the 
>>most efficient way to proceed given the OASIS process.
>>
>>The changes to the normative references need to 
>>be studied in some detail.  It has also been 
>>noted that in ITU recommendation that in the 
>>DOM, Response Type is not specified correctly. 
>>It is, however, correct in their Data 
>>Dictionary.  They did not have the benefit of 
>>the correction to "assess".  As you recall, we 
>>listed "assess" in our data dictionary but it 
>>was not listed in the schema and we have 
>>already prepared errata document for that 
>>(thanks to Patti and Rex).  This errata has 
>>been voted on by the TC but not yet submitted for 15-day public comment.
>>
>>Since there is already one noted discrepancy in 
>>the ITU recommendation (between their DOM and 
>>data dictionary), I am hopeful that they will 
>>make this minor correction as well as the one 
>>for "assess" and we can move forward without 
>>them having to go through another 
>>recommendation cycle.  I think we are all in 
>>agreement that it would be best if these 
>>Standards can track directly and do not splinter.
>>
>>With there only being less than a week for us 
>>to meet their requested response time, I am 
>>hopeful that all of you will take a good hard 
>>look at these changes and post any 
>>questions/comments to the list.  If we break 
>>this task up into pieces, it may help.  The more eyes the better.
>>
>>Tasks:
>>1.  Read/compare documents word for word and list any discrepancies
>>2.  Study the normative references to be sure they are correct
>>3.  Validate the ASN.1 notation is a correct 
>>representation and technically equivalent to the XML schema
>>
>>Jamie Clark and I are doing #1, others please 
>>join in.  Could a couple of you agree to comb 
>>through the references and compare?  Is there 
>>one or more of our members who are (or have 
>>access to someone that is)  ASN.1 knowledgeable 
>>that can verify the ASN schema, please identify yourself and work this part.
>>
>>Please respond to this note with your 
>>willingness to take on a task, then we can 
>>start a discussion list on each task.  Also 
>>with your response, let me know 2 or 3 times 
>>when you would be available for a telecon to 
>>discuss over the next few days.  I suggest we 
>>schedule one for either Thurs or Fri evening 
>>when Renato and Karen might be available and 
>>possibly one for Sunday or Monday evening.  We 
>>have a normally scheduled TC meeting on Tues, 
>>May 1 where we can do any final voting that may 
>>be necessary. Other suggestions welcomed.
>>
>>In the interest of public safety worldwide, 
>>let's take this time to get this work complete! 
>>However, let's make sure it is correct.  Thanks 
>>to all of you and your hard work and contributions.
>>
>>Warm regards,
>>Elysa Jones, Chair
>>OASIS EM-TC
>>Program Manager
>>Warning Systems, Inc.
>>256-880-8702 x102
>>256-694-8702 (cell)
>>
>>Attachment converted: Macintosh 
>>HD:COM17-LS179-Attcht11.doc (WDBN/«IC») (001FC888)
>>Attachment converted: Macintosh 
>>HD:COM17-LS179-Attcht21.doc (WDBN/«IC») (001FC889)
>
>
>--
>Rex Brooks
>President, CEO
>Starbourne Communications Design
>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>Berkeley, CA 94702
>Tel: 510-849-2309
>