[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [emergency] CAP v EDXL?
At 11:47 AM +1000 4/22/05, Renato Iannella wrote: >Hi all - I apologise if this issue has already been raised and discussed, >but I am slightly confused as to the scope of CAP versus EDXL within the >context of this TC? Renato - CAP came first and focused on alerting/eventing/attention-management applications. EDXL was a follow-on initiative to create an integrating framework for a wide range of emergency data exchange standards to support operations, logistics, planning and finance. (The first instance of EDXL is set to be a common routing-assertion element that can be used to envelop other kinds of XML documents including CAP messages... but that's just one component, not the whole idea.) The Technical Committee's plan has been to continue to refine the existing CAP 1.0 spec, which is already in use in a variety of systems and addresses a number of immediate needs, though one or more sub-versions (CAP 1.1 being in work right now)... while at the same time setting up the broader EDXL framework... and then to bring CAP into that larger framework with CAP 2.0 at some point in the future. So... CAP is a particular document for a narrow set of applications... while EDXL was conceived as a much broader framework for integrating numerous documents and application types. Perhaps an even narrower distinction is between the EDXL and the U.S. National Information Exchange Model (NIEM), which is based on the U.S. Global Justice XML Data Model. Other folks here can speak to that relationship better than I can, but I will point out that OASIS operates on an international basis, whereas the NIEM is a U.S. government initiative... and also that, again, EDXL was launched prior to the announcement of NIEM, so some degree of overlap is not necessarily surprising. A few enterprising journalists have characterized the EDXL/NIEM relationship vividly as "dueling XML efforts," but I think that's a superficial and flawed characterization. Everyone involved is working together toward shared goals, and there's certainly plenty of work to go around. Hope that helps! - Art