<category> values validated?

[Art Botterell <acb@incident.com>]

Friends -

Just for fun I'm attaching a comparison of the CAP 1.0 <category> 
values with the more detailed taxonomy discussed today for a 
message-routing header for general emergency data sharing.

It looks like our initial, very high-level taxonomy held up pretty 
well against a wide range of categorization schemes and practitioner 
inputs.  The only casualty was the "Safety" category, which appears 
to have been redundant.

I don't see this as an immediate action item... more of a 
nice-to-know thing, for now... but it looks like whenever the time 
comes to revisit CAP we'd have objective grounds for sticking with 
the current scheme (sans "Safety", perhaps).  Alternatively, if we 
embrace the finer-grained scheme from the "EDXL" project at some 
point, at least we have reason to believe it'll map cleanly to our 
current version.

Thanks!

- Art

CAP_w_EDXL_SMF_compare.doc