[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm
That is clear. Thank you, Paul. We work in a world of overlapping specifications, thus mixed requirements. Wherever a specification is cited as a procurement item, the Record of Authority to govern that procurement must be cited in the contract (likely by URI and a versioning mechanism). If such citation incurs confused requirements, the procuring authority must govern the resolution and amend the ROA. Given the depth of our XML specifications and the likelihood of overlaps, that can be a hard job. I note the W3C is working the versioning problems for XML and others are working versioning problems for ontologies. Len Bullard -----Original Message----- From: Paul Embley [mailto:pembley@mstar.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 1:51 PM To: Bullard, Claude L (Len); 'Poindexter, Gary'; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm As far as grant specific guidelines, since I don't work directly for OJP I don't feel qualified to answer. That said, here is my opinion (which only matters to my dog). Re: someone implementing CAP without OJP funding, there isn't any compliance with JXDM to discuss. If someone implements a system with CAP and JXDM, compliance is optional for those doing the implementation, unless funding is coming from OJP, then the implementation is governed by the grant guidelines unless specific exemptions are granted. Not sure I answered the question, but hopefully this is clear. I believe most of the public safety companies, especially those involved in the Integrated Justice Working Group (iwg.ijis.org) have determined it is easier to build their systems to be fully compliant than to do one compliant and another not. Paul -----Original Message----- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@intergraph.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 11:09 AM To: 'Paul Embley'; 'Poindexter, Gary'; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm So: Grant money requires JXDM compliance and CAP is not JXDM so compliance with JXDM is not required when implementing CAP? Public safety companies want to know. The lack of objections does not close the requirement for compliant deliverables. Of the documents posted, which are the Records of Authority governing the procurement transactions? Len Bullard Integraph Public Safety -----Original Message----- From: Paul Embley [mailto:pembley@mstar.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:03 AM To: 'Poindexter, Gary'; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm Hey Gary (et al), Allen is correct about the fact that the CAP effort is not funded by OJP. Some/many (can't recall off the top of my head how many) of the efforts utilizing CAP receive some amount of OJP funding, and I've not heard of any who have objected to the grant language. I know for most of those grants the language was the old "OJP *may* require compliance" vs. the newer language which I believe is less vague. Both Ken Gill (OJP) and I have been discussing that we need to do a better job of reaching out to the CAP community. Your e-mail gives us reason to do more than talk about it, so appreciate you monitoring and reaching out to the CAP community. Also wanted to note that Art's message is correct as well. We started from the same base, then didn't remain as active in each other's efforts as maybe we should have. Nothing that can't be resolved with better communication. Thanks again! Paul Embley Global XML Structured Task Force Chair -----Original Message----- From: Poindexter, Gary [mailto:gary.poindexter@bearingpoint.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:34 AM To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm I believe you've missed the point. They have defined compliance in the context of how a schema is constructed and stated that this someone will promote interoperability. They then require "compliance" for all OJP funded projects that use XML. In effect, if you don't follow their guidelines for constructing a schema based upon the jxdm, you are not compliant. gary -----Original Message----- From: R. Allen Wyke [mailto:emergency-tc@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 4:58 AM To: Poindexter, Gary Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [emergency] OJP requirement to use the jxdm There may have been CAP implementations funded by various groups, but the efforts of this Technical Committee at OASIS is funded by no one other than the members dedicating their time and any resources they so do choose. In short, we are an open standards committee that is not directed by any other group. Good question though - Allen On Jul 27, 2004, at 12:29 AM, Poindexter, Gary wrote: > > Please excuse my potential ignorance, I watch this TC with interest > but participate sparingly. > > A couple assumptions: > > 1) EM projects are sometimes funded by the OJP. > > 2) The CAP 1.0 proposal is not in any way consistent with the Justice > XML Data Dictionary model (jxdm). I believe this was discussed at some > point in the past and efficiency was chosen as a higher priority than > the sometimes massive and inefficient schemas developed using the > jxdm. > > If these assumptions are true, members of this TC need to review and > comment (to OJP) on the contents of the page at > http://it.ojp.gov/topic.jsp?topic_id=138 and most importantly the > statement at the bottom of the page which reads: > > "All recipients of Office of Justice Programs (OJP) grants for > projects implementing XML technology are required to use the Global > Justice XML Data Model and publish all XML schemas resulting from use > of the Model in the Justice Standards Clearinghouse (JSC) located at > http://www.it.ojp.gov/jsc. This requirement is stipulated as a Special > Condition to their grant that is referred to as a Common Exchange > Standard." > > If my assumptions are correct, the impact of this requirement could be > great and negative. > > gary poindexter > > > *********************************************************************** > **************************** > The information in this email is confidential and may be legally > privileged. Access to this email by anyone other than the intended > addressee is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient of > this message, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, > retention, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on > it is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended > recipient, please reply to or forward a copy of this message to the > sender and delete the message, any attachments, and any copies thereof > from your system. > *********************************************************************** > **************************** **************************************************************************** *********************** The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. Access to this email by anyone other than the intended addressee is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution, retention, or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to or forward a copy of this message to the sender and delete the message, any attachments, and any copies thereof from your system. **************************************************************************** *********************** 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/members/leave_workgro up.php. 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/members/leave_workgro up.php.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]