Lee,
I would again reinforce to use the
schema as the normative source - the below items again pertain to the example
which is just a snippet and should not be used as the source since it was never
updated following the changes in the schema (#2 below is a good example,
TriageCount was changed from a complex element to a Type and I agree we should provide
examples are separate files). In fact, we added a couple of sentences in Appendix
A, in the Errata to highlight these items. The below questions are definitely
based on the example and I would ask folks to suggest using the examples in the
zipped file that I sent a couple of hours ago.
So far, the issue that I see is the Bed
Capacity and I agree with David W’s suggestion to use the Bed Type at the
parent level while we work on a solution.
If there are other items, let us discuss
when you get a chance.
Thanks
Sukumar
From: Lee Tincher
[mailto:ltincher@evotecinc.com]
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 8:23
AM
To: 'Sukumar Dwarkanath';
wllang@shoreland.com; kpy@google.com
Cc: momander@google.com;
emergency@lists.oasis-open.org; Denis.Gusty@dhs.gov;
bill.kalin@associates.dhs.gov; jeff.waters@gmail.com; Dwarkanath,
Sukumar - INTL
Subject: RE: Fw: [emergency] RE:
EDXL-HAVE spec questions
Sukumar – I am
sorry but that is only part of the problem.
The following 2 are
not about the example – but real world broken problems in the
Schema…
1. The <xpil:OrganisationInfo> element seems to be in the wrong
order. According to the schema, it seems it should appear between
<xnl:OrganisationName> and <xpil:Addresses>, not after
<xpil:Addresses>. Can you confirm?
2. The example has a <have:TriageCount> element, but there is no
such XML element in the schema. According to the schema, it seems that
<have:TriageCodeListURN> and <have:TriageCode> should be immediate
children of <have:EMSCapacity>. Can you confirm?
Thanks,
Lee
Better to write for yourself
and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self. - Cyril Connolly
From: Sukumar
Dwarkanath [mailto:sukumar.dwarkanath@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 8:10
AM
To: wllang@shoreland.com;
kpy@google.com; ltincher@evotecinc.com
Cc: momander@google.com;
emergency@lists.oasis-open.org; Denis.Gusty@dhs.gov;
bill.kalin@associates.dhs.gov; jeff.waters@gmail.com;
sukumar_dwarkanath@sra.com
Subject: Re: Fw: [emergency] RE:
EDXL-HAVE spec questions
From the questions, it looks like all the questions pertain to the
example included in the Standard. The sample was provided to illustrate a few
concepts and will not validate. Jeff and I have been working on providing a
package with all the schemas and examples that one will need - I have
attached the zipped file. Both of us have checked and the files do validate -
please let us know if you have any issues.
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Dwarkanath,
Sukumar - INTL <Sukumar_Dwarkanath@sra.com>
wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Tincher <ltincher@evotecinc.com>
To: 'Ka-Ping Yee' <kpy@google.com>;
'Bill Lang' <wllang@shoreland.com>
CC: 'Roni Zeiger' <zeiger@google.com>;
'Martin Omander' <momander@google.com>;
emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
<emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>;
'Gusty, Denis' <Denis.Gusty@dhs.gov>;
'William Kalin' <bill.kalin@associates.dhs.gov>
Sent: Mon Mar 01 07:14:01 2010
Subject: [emergency] RE: EDXL-HAVE spec questions
Ka-Ping,
You are correct in all points on the new Errata. I have been in contact
with OASIS to get this clarified/fixed ASAP. The PR4 errata does not have
many of these errors (but has some other ones)…
All – we need this clarified as soon as we can – this is
excessively important to the success of HAVE in the Haiti response.
Thanks,
Lee
Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public
and have no self. - Cyril Connolly <http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Cyril_Connolly/>
From: Ka-Ping Yee [mailto:kpy@google.com]
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 5:27 AM
To: Lee Tincher; Bill Lang
Cc: Roni Zeiger; Martin Omander
Subject: EDXL-HAVE spec questions
Hello Lee,
I've run into a couple of problems with the EDXL specification, and was hoping
you could help out?
This is the document I'm using:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/edxl-have/os/emergency_edxl_have-1.0-spec-os.pdf
(This is the link listed at http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/index.php#edxlhave.)
And this is the XSD schema I'm using:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/emergency/edxl-have/os/edxl-have-os.xsd
First, a few things that look like simple typos in the EDXL-HAVE example
document (Appendix A):
1. The <xpil:OrganisationInfo> element seems to be in the wrong
order. According to the schema, it seems it should appear between
<xnl:OrganisationName> and <xpil:Addresses>, not after
<xpil:Addresses>. Can you confirm?
2. The example has a <have:TriageCount> element, but there is no such XML
element in the schema. According to the schema, it seems that
<have:TriageCodeListURN> and <have:TriageCode> should be immediate
children of <have:EMSCapacity>. Can you confirm?
3. The example has a <have:Offload> element, but there is no such XML
element in the schema. According to the schema, it seems that
<have:EMSOffloadStatus> and <have:EMSOffloadMinutes> should be
immediate children of <have:EMSAmbulanceStatus>. Can you confirm?
4. The example has a <have:AdultGeneralSugery> element, which I assume is
a typographic error and should be <have:AdultGeneralSurgery>. Can
you confirm?
Second, though, a more concerning problem with the BedCapacity section (Section
3.2.4):
The text, and example 1, suggest that the <have:BedCapacity> element
should contain a (<BedType>, <Capacity>) pair, followed by any
number of (<SubCategoryBedType>, <Capacity>) pairs.
However, example 1 doesn't validate. The XSD schema doesn't allow for
this structure; it only allows zero or more <BedType> elements, followed
by zero or more <SubCategoryBedType> elements, followed by zero or more
<Capacity> elements.
I can't figure out how to properly represent or interpret bed capacities in
this structure. Can you advise on the correct method? If it is true
that this just doesn't work as intended, should we decide to use only
<BedType> and avoid the use of <SubCategoryBedType> in the
EDXL-HAVE Haiti Profile?
Many thanks!
— Ping
Technical Lead, Google Person Finder