Profile Draft Question

["Art Botterell" <abott@so.cccounty.us>]

** High Priority **

Rex -

In taking a quick first look at the ATIS-TIA comments, I noticed that at some point someone added the following language in section 1.1 Purpose:  "A single CAP <alert> MAY be created at message origination with multiple <info> blocks – one <info> block for each disparate exchange partner, as necessary."  Where did that come from?  (It's in orange, if that's any clue.)

I recall us doing quite a bit of work to see if we could avoid that, as it runs counter to the basic interoperability goal of having a single consistent CAP message that can drive all systems.  So this would seem to be a departure from the intent of the SC as well as being inconsistent with the data dictionary in section 2.

The SC approved a set of tables for referral to the TC, so I assume this may have been simply an editorial cut-and-paste accident.  This is an example of why I think we may want to focus as tightly as possible on working through the substantive issues before we add a lot of ancillary text that could create confusion. 

- Art