Re: [emergency-msg] <category> values validated?

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Hi All,

This looks like something we should investigate or explore further. I'll 
have to look at this later, like tomorrow, but I'm glad to have a chance to 
do so. Should we tentatively schedule this for next week's agenda?

So thanks, Art, for keeping us in the loop on this.

Ciao,
Rex

At 10:19 PM 8/23/2004, Art Botterell wrote:
>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
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of 
>the OASIS TC), go to 
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/emergency-msg/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>

Rex Brooks      Starbourne Communications Design
WebAddress      http://www.starbourne.com
GeoAddress:     1361-A Addison
                 Berkeley, CA, USA 94702
Tel:            510-849-2309