RE: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - First draftfor discussion (from Gary Ham)

[RCarlton@eteam.com]

Hi Gary,

 

Regarding your confusion over the scope of the Adapted Infrastructure Charter;

 

I specifically used the word "Adapted" to allow for the broadest possible work-product scope and intended that, as a group, we would hash out the concerns you raise, as well as others that will undoubtedly surface by the time we are together. I understand your interest, as well as the differences between "pure" underlying infrastructure versus registry and management of user communities, versus process deployment as a practical matter, and thought that these topics would be most easily, and rapidly, addressed face-to-face. Ergo, the non-specific language in my initial statement which was simply intended to establish what intellectual "region" we intended to work in.

 

Rick

-----"R. Allen Wyke" <emtc@nc.rr.com> wrote: -----

To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
From: "R. Allen Wyke" <emtc@nc.rr.com>
Date: 03/31/2003 01:51PM
Subject: RE: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - First draft for discussion (from Gary Ham)

Forwarded on behalf of Gary...

-----Forwarded Message-----
> From: "Ham, Gary A" <hamg@BATTELLE.ORG>
> To: 'emtc@nc.rr.com' <emtc@nc.rr.com>
> Subject: RE: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - Fir st draft for discussion
> Date: 31 Mar 2003 15:51:18 -0500
>
> I tried to sent the following to the mailing list but was bounced. I am
> getting posts. I just cannot send them.
>
> Regarding the Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter:
> I am a bit confused. Are we talking standards for information or for process
> or for both? Or are we also talking about the actual control function of the
> "information space" for the emergency information? Or the information
> parameters to be shared which would facilitate that control. I think that we
> need a bit more in the way of specifics in the statement of purpose. The
> scope is still a bit cloudy to me.
> Over time, I believe that it will be in the Federal interest to establish an
> official infrastructure for information sharing in a controlled environment.
> This organization and facilitation of such a controlled "information space"
> available to all who are authorized is the primary (and fully approved) goal
> of the DHS Disaster Management eGov initiative. It is the essential charter
> for the program. Industry standards play an important role in assuring that
> the interfaces to this controlled information space are clean and well
> understood such that all commercial efforts have the ability to share on a
> fair and equal basis. More importantly, it allows the information content
> that can be shared to grow because the growth of effective commercial
> applications will provide far more substance, sooner, to our responders and
> the citizens they support.
> The Disaster Management Initiative is therefore committed to implementing
> effective commercial standards within its official interoperability
> infrastructure. That these standards might be used for less official (even
> uncontrolled) information exchanges is also not a bad thing. There needs to
> be some flexibility in the information space. The controlled space (like
> controlled airspace for commercial aviation) is an inherently governmental
> function.
> Respectfully,
> Gary Ham
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RCarlton@eteam.com [mailto:RCarlton@eteam.com
> <mailto:RCarlton@eteam.com> ]
> Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 7:52 PM
> To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [emergency] Adapted Infrastructure Subcommittee Charter - First
> draft for discussion
>
> ADAPTED INFRASTRUCTURE SUBCOMMITTEE - STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
>
> While it is agreed that development of EM functional standards are critical
> to the production of interoperable applications, the doctrinal emergence of
> NIMS (National Incident Management System) additionally implies compliance
> with certain common, as well as dissimilar, network and services
> infrastructures governing global delivery and deployment. Since elemental
> work in infrastructure development (OASIS, W3C, IBM, Oracle etc.) has been
> progressing for some time it is illogical for the EM-TC to evolve its own
> standards from a clean sheet. As an adjunct to the committee's work,
> however, and in order to insure standardized, end-to-end interoperability
> the committee will analyze and adapt various elements of current and
> emerging work as a component of its standardized EM topology. This, then, is
> the purpose of the proposed sub-committee.
>
> LIST OF DELIVERABLES
>
> To be defined during the 4.3.03 meeting.
>
>
>
>
> Gary Ham
>
> "You would be surprised what you can accomplish when you do not care who
> gets the credit." - Harry S. Truman
>
>
>
--
R. Allen Wyke
Chair, Emergency Management TC
emtc@nc.rr.com
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/emergency