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] Illogical Naming was: Re: [emergency] Sensors and Systems Charter Starting Point


Carl,
Outstanding input! Thanks!
 
Regards,
 
Tom Merkle
 
CapWIN:        www.capwin.org
Phone:          (301) 614-3720
Cell Phone:   (240) 375-1966
Fax:               (301) 614-0581
e-mail:           tmerkle@capwin.org
 
CapWIN
6305 Ivy Lane Suite 300
Capital Office Park
Greenbelt, MD 20770
 


From: Carl Reed OGC [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org]
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 2:07 PM
To: Kon Wilms; Vandame, Richard; Elysa Jones
Cc: Rex Brooks; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [emergency] Illogical Naming was: Re: [emergency] Sensors and Systems Charter Starting Point

Perhaps, as Elysa suggests, we do need to step back and define what we mean by a sensor and a "sensed" event - or measurement - but I am sure that this will also create a dialogue. As with most standards work, one needs to start with agreement on semantics - terms, definitions and/or vocabulary. This is often the most difficult aspect of standards development!
 
Anyway, in the OGC membership, we have a very large group of sensor technology providers and users. The following are some definitions agreed to by the OGC membership. They may be of use.
 
  1. Sensor

An entity capable of observing a phenomenon and returning an observed value. A sensor can be an instrument or a living organism (e.g. a person), but herein we concern ourselves primarily with modelling instruments, not people.

  1. 4.12 Sensor Model

In line with traditional definitions, a sensor model is a type of Location Model that allows one to georegister observations from a sensor (particularly remote sensors).

  1. 4.13 (Sensor) Platform

An entity to which can be attached sensors or other platforms. A platform has an associated local coordinate frame that can be referenced to an external coordinate reference frame and to which the frames of attached sensors and platforms can be referenced.

  1. 4.4 Measurement

An instance of a procedure to estimate of the value of a natural phenomenon, typically involving an instrument or sensor. This is implemented as a dynamic feature type, which has a property containing the result of the measurement. The measurement feature also has a location, time, and reference to the method used to determine the value. A measurement feature effectively binds a value to a location and to a method or instrument.

  1. 4.5 Observed Value

A value describing a natural phenomenon, which may use one of a variety of scales including nominal, ordinal, ratio and interval. The term is used regardless of whether the value is due to an instrumental observation, a subjective assignment or some other method of estimation or assignment.

Have at it!

Carl

----- Original Message -----
From: "Elysa Jones" <ejones@warningsystems.com>
To: "Kon Wilms" <kon@datacast.biz>; "Vandame, Richard" <Richard.Vandame@associates.dhs.gov>
Cc: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>; <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 10:47 AM
Subject: RE: [emergency] Illogical Naming was: Re: [emergency] Sensors and Systems Charter Starting Point

> Most of what we do with our EM standards work involves the movement of
> information in response to a detected event - be that a visual or otherwise
> "sensed" event.  Much of the discussion about "systems" was actually more
> about work flow and dissemination of information during an incident.  We
> may should revisit the terms we use so as not to be misunderstood - say
> sensors and work flow?  We deemed it important to designate sensors
> separately due to the work that is developing in the labs and elsewhere
> that EM standards are needed.  These groups are looking to the TC for
> guidance and having a special place they can discuss their specific needs
> would be helpful.  Comments?  Elysa
>
> At 11:06 AM 7/15/2005, Kon Wilms wrote:
>>I guess that proves my point.
>>
>>Cheers
>>Kon
>>
>>On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 06:58 -0400, Vandame, Richard wrote:
>> > Non-sensers, perhaps.
>> >
>> > Rich
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Kon Wilms [mailto:kon@datacast.biz]
>> > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 5:20 PM
>> > To: Rex Brooks; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>> > Subject: [emergency] Illogical Naming was: Re: [emergency] Sensors and
>> > Systems Charter Starting Point
>> >
>> > I have to say that I still do not see the logic behind the naming of
>> > these focus groups.
>> >
>> > A sensor network is a system (and may comprise multiple systems), for
>> > example. What category do systems that do not make use of sensors fall
>> > under?
>>
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>

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