OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

emergency-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [emergency-comment] Re: [emergency-cap-profiles] Preliminary thoughts on a few of Jacob's latest comments



>
> From a standards point of view, the profile sends a very 
> contradictory message.  In CAP it states that geocodes are all but 
> deprecated and that geospatial is the preferred area 
> representation.  But the Profile then makes a SAME geocode element 
> required.  The geocode should be left optional but the Profile can 
> define its form.  In practice many will use the geocode anyways, 
> but SAME geocodes should not be required because then its no longer 
> just "legacy support".
>
>With regards to endec support.  Again there is no technological 
>reason the endecs cannot do geospatial calculations.  I personally 
>have written a real-time GPS nav system that ran on a $5 
>microcontroller doing more complicated calculations than just the 
>required "point in polygon".  The code and computational resources 
>necessary to do these calculations are much less than say, decoding 
>an MP3 file included in the resource block, XML signature/encryption 
>decoding of the CAP message, or performing text-to-speech 
>translation of the message.
>
>It would become an additional selling feature to support 
>geospatial.  A manufacturer could offer a GPS option.  The GPS would 
>provide a consistent date/time signal and perhaps offer an 
>auto-config method for easy setup to prevent configuration errors, 
>the GPS populates the geospatial location and SAME geocodes at the 
>same time.  I'm sure the broadcasters would be interested in 
>reducing alert message spillover and the viewer complaints that can result.

A couple of short comments:

1)  The area covered by a radio station's signal (or the operational 
area defined by the state EAS plan, or the area targeted by the 
program director) often has little to do with where the GPS receiver might be.
2)  Unless there is one agreed upon database of FIPS area polygons to 
use, having each manufacturer compute what FIPS code a CAP alert is 
meant for could result in one device sending an alert to one county, 
and another sending it to a different county (or an additional 
county), resulting in an extra alert running around in the EAS 
domain.  A major intent of the EAS-CAP group was to make sure that 
EAS renderers don't spin off undetectable duplicates.  If the 
originator supplies the information, as least all downstream devices 
can still easily generate the identical ZCZC string.

Harold Price




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]