RE: [emergency] EDXL/CAP Survey

["Daconta, Michael" <Michael.Daconta@dhs.gov>]

Here are some clarifications for the group's benefit...

1. The FEA DRM is distinct from NIEM and GJXDM.
2. We agree that simplicity is important which is why NIEM (of which
GJXDM forms the initial baseline) is taking a modular approach.  NIEM
0.1 will include a key subset called "universal core".  We are
internally vetting the universal core now.  After internal vetting, we
will release it for public vetting (same as we are doing with the DRM).
3. We are piloting NIEM concepts before we release to insure that the
approach is solid.

Regards,

Michael C. Daconta
Metadata Program Manager
Department of Homeland Security
tel: (202)692-4340
email: michael.daconta@dhs.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@intergraph.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 10:51 AM
To: 'Rex Brooks'; Emergency_Mgt_TC
Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL/CAP Survey

Ok.  Here is the other view:

As I sit here looking through the DRM, I am lightly convinced 
that the chances the public safety industry will be implementing 
this soon are functionally zero.

The problem of any top down design is the bottom up legacy that ensures
that

no clean break can ever be made given an active procurement cycle.
No one starts from scratch and the active legacy is much more 
important to the agency than Federal mandates.  Changing a tire 
on a moving car in an intersection is dangerous work.

GJXDM as a big honking piece of middleware for bits on the 
wire is possible.  It isn't likely that the relational system 
schemas will be changed to match the unwieldy and verbose 
GJ elements:

1.  Not a good design for relational systems.  Performance 
    requirements for queries typically range from one to 
    four seconds for a query of medium complexity.  These 
    designs favor too much standalone context.
2.  It is too disruptive to unhorse all of the 
    current systems to convert their data.
3.  RDF is a non-starter.  Show us the commercial 
    frameworks (say operating systems and programming 
    frameworks with more than 10% of the market) that 
    support it today because even if supported today, 
    there is about a three to five year gap to fielding of 
    robust, secure, reliable products.
4.  IEPs are a good idea but every agency we 
    deal with has its own reports, some State mandated, 
    some agency mandated, some JIT ad hoc.  How many 
    years are given for any local agency to convert to 
    the IEPs (keep in mind how many states are still UCR 
    despite NIBRS)?

At some point, DHS and DoJ are going to realize that 
there isn't enough funding to get this done and they 
will vastly simplify the requirements.  The Federal 
budget is strained and there is no end in sight to the 
Executive-initiated events that are draining resources.

A roll-out plan that confronts the reality of the 
procurement and legacy issues is needed.  It will 
have to be much simpler because submarining these 
languages in by reference to GJXDM means that the 
vendors and procurement officials will waive the 
bulk of GJXDM in favor of the 'most useful' subset 
as determined by the local agency.

len


From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]

Hi Len,

CAP is now included in GJXDM, so RFPs contingent on the GJXDM are 
also axiomatically contingent on CAP compliance within GJXDM, if 
required.

DHS will likely stipulate CAP in its applicable RFPs. the Public 
Forum for the Data Reference Model yesterday included CAP because it 
was part of the pilot we (Starbourne) will be doing for the Semantic 
Interoperability Architecture effort for September. I will keep this 
group apprised of that work as it proceeds.

EDXL is likely to be a key piece of NIMS as it gets built out. We are 
hammering on the Distribution Element again today.

Ciao,
Rex

At 8:39 AM -0500 6/14/05, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Something to chew on.   This week I received
>a COMCARE survey for information on EDXL/CAP
>implementations, customers, populations served, etc.
>I have to reply that as of this time, we have
>no information about that to be released.
>
>As mentioned previously, public safety is an
>RFP-driven business.   Requirements that don't
>show up in at least three separate RFPs aren't
>likely to be implemented soon if ever.  How
>is this group and its supporters in government
>working to see to it that these specifications
>and standards are introduced commercially to
>the public safety industry through procurement
>processes?
>
>Are there papers that explicitly illustrate where
>these standards fit into the product mix that an
>agency would be acquiring when purchasing say
>Dispatch, police, fire and EMT records systems?
>
>Who declares a situation that would result in
>an EDXL/CAP message being broadcast?  Who receives
>it and under what jurisdiction?
>
>We've discussed some of these topics briefly in the
>past, but I think that before we will see these
>standards in more than one or two very large
>procurements, the procurement officials need help
>with the requirements language.  I see mentions of
>GJXDM but little of EDXL/CAP.
>
>len
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php


-- 
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php