OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

emergency message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [emergency] RE: OMA Specification that may be highly relevant to EDXL work. Check it out.

Len -
I am not advocating a CALS approach! :-)
I am advocating reuse of existing standards, ontologies, and related vocabulary when and where appropriate. Creating a new standard from the ether that does not seek any harmonization with other, well deployed standards work creates islands of standards (sort of like islands of automation) that do not themselves interoperate. I do not think anyone in the EM TC wants EDXL to exist in isolation.
I think we can all agree that we do not want to complicate the process. We do want clarity. But we also want long term usability and we want OASIS standards that are useful and relevant beyond the requirements of one US Federal organization! EDXL, if properly done, will have uptake in other countries. Even from a more parochial perspective, I would suspect that DHS would like to be able to "interoperate" much better with Canada, Mexico, and other nations in a time of crisis. Just a thought.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 9:16 AM
Subject: RE: [emergency] RE: OMA Specification that may be highly relevant to EDXL work. Check it out.

Versions of that drawing are older than 1999.   Feedback is feedback.  Existing
fielded systems talk in terms of roles, subscriptions for publish/subscribe and
so forth.  Outside of real-time 3D, I'm not even sure what terms like 'presence'
My concern is that over time, introducing more liaisons, organizations and overlapping
standards will complicate the process, lengthen it, and dilute the outcome.  My hope
is that DHS is able to create a strategy for short-term systems to be deployed in the
next two years, middle term for the next five to seven years, and out to ten years which
is realistically as far as we can play.  For this to work, a Draconian reduction in the
standards and terminology and organizations that produce them is required. 
Otherwise, this becomes CALS again and we will watch another $4 billion evaporate
without fielding any interoperable systems.
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Reed OGC [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 4:49 PM
To: Bullard, Claude L (Len); emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [emergency] RE: OMA Specification that may be highly relevant to EDXL work. Check it out.

Claude -
Actually, the work of the IETF pre-dates anything being done in this area by OASIS, the OGC, or OMA. The original SIP Internet RFC dates back to 1999. SIP has been extended since then and there are a number of companion RFC's related to presence, events, and so forth. And while PIDF and PIDF-LO are working their way through the IETF process, I think that it is excellent that OMA is building on the work of other standards organizations rather than re-inventing the wheel. Further, the PIDF-LO draft leverages the work of the OGC - uses GML 3.1.
Kind regards
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 12:01 PM
Subject: RE: [emergency] RE: OMA Specification that may be highly relevant to EDXL work. Check it out.

It is amazing how many ways and terms we can find to abstract
roles and subscriptions so we can have yet another locus of
control based standard.
Standards and speeches:  the full time consultant economy.
Personally rooting for the DHS ontology efforts to tie it all together.

From: Carl Reed OGC [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org]
I dug around the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) site - actually looking for standards info OASIS can use as part of their EDXL work. Reviewed a document titled OMA-TS-Presence_SIMPLE-V1_0-20050427-C. The intro paragraph states:

The document defines an application level specification for the OMA SIP/SIMPLE-based Presence Service. It defines the presence information semantics for presence information conveyed using the Presence Information Data Format (PIDF) the Rich Presence Information Data Format (RPID) and geographical information conveyed in a GEOPRIV location object (see [PIDFLO]) specified by the IETF in conjunction with the overall Presence Data Model defined in [PRESDATAMODEL].

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]