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: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn

What he said . . .

And this also gets to the issue we discussed in the IF SC call today. There 
is considerable misunderstanding and need for education in the market place 
regarding the use and implementation of EDXL. Part of this education is that 
EDXL is a transport mechanism and must/can be viewed as independent from the 
technology implementation infrastructure. It should not matter if the 
enterprise (in the virtual sense) is implementing against a middleware bus, 
using SOAP/WSDL/UDDI, using ebRIM/XML, using an OGC Catalog, using the 
COMCARE EPAD application, using Java enterprise beans, etc. I view EDXL as 
technology implementation neutral - as it should be.

Am I wrong in thinking this?

Also, my previous email was more about making sure that the discussions in 
the EM TC on EDXL do not totally go totally US DHS/DoD centric. I understand 
the immediate requirement but we cannot loose sight of the bigger picture. 
For example, I would love to be able to recommend EDXL to ORCHESTRA in 



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rex Brooks" <rexb@starbourne.com>
To: "SIA Pilot-6" <sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>; "Carl Reed OGC Account" 
<creed@opengeospatial.org>; <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org>
Cc: "Haleftiras, Pericles" <phaleftiras@systechnologies.com>; "Glaser, 
Ronald" <rfglase@sandia.gov>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 5:33 PM
Subject: [emergency] Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and 

>I don't think Carl misunderstood that different valueListUrns are possible. 
>Of course, I could be wrong, but I doubt it. I think Carl's concern is that 
>some people may think that Dave's proposal was for a single valueListUrn. I 
>do not think Dave is doing that. I think Dave is responding to the call for 
>various groups to start producing, publishing and maintaining these 
>necessary valueListUrns so that we can start using them in EDXL_DE routed 
> All of the international groups and constituencies mentioned need to be 
> informed that it is now incumbent upon them to provide these semantic 
> resources so that their systems, be they SensorNets or weatherAlerts, can 
> be properly connected through our Emergency Response Networks.
> Ciao,
> Rex
> At 5:00 PM -0700 3/20/06, Ellis, David wrote:
>>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
>>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>> boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C64C7A.707355BB"
>>All of scenarios you have proposed could use seperate valueListUrn to 
>>control distribution of data within defined Area of Responsiblities.  If 
>>transfer of data is needed between these AORs, methods for exchanging 
>>messages are avaiable.  When can we talk about this.  I believe all of 
>>your domain issues are potential misunderstandings how routing is 
>>David E. Ellis
>>Information Management Architect
>>(505) 844-6697
>>From: Carl Reed OGC Account [mailto:creed@opengeospatial.org]
>>Sent: Mon 3/20/2006 4:20 PM
>>To: Ellis, David; SIA Pilot-6; emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>>Cc: Harry Haury; Haleftiras, Pericles; Glaser, Ronald
>>Subject: Re: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn
>>David -
>>While I understand the urgency and while I do not necessarily disagree 
>>the contents of your slides on a National Effort for Emergency Data
>>Distribution, I would like to add a few words of caution.
>>First, what you have outlined are uses cases and requirements for one 
>>of use - alerts as related to secure US DoD sensor nets. I deal with folks
>>doing sensor systems and networks in a number of other countries - all
>>civilian. Any of these applications using sensors can create alerts. For
>>example, a new water portal in Canada that will send alerts based on 
>>flow gauges, traffic alerts being generated by the new generation of ITS
>>capabilities, weather alerts, and systems function alerts being generated 
>>transducers, and so forth. We cannot loose sight of all the other 
>>use cases that drives the requirements for EDXL - now and in the future.
>>Second, and related to the first, is the fact that OASIS is an 
>>standards organization. As such, we cannot ignore requirements for using
>>EDXL that may be extremely viable in other countries. It is unfortunate 
>>we have had little input from organizations in other countries that have
>>requirements similar to the US DoD. That is why I am very pleased with the
>>progress of the Sensor Standards Harmonization work that NIST is
>>Third, we would be remiss in ignoring the potential for alerts coming from
>>the emerging sensor nets being designed, built, and fairly recently 
>>for home systems and office buildings (office sensor networks are much 
>>mature). See 
>>well as all the work being done at UCLA (SOS) and Sun (SUN SPOT). These
>>systems are envisioned as being able to automatically generate alerts 
>>carbon monoxide, health, etc).
>>Finally, and anyone (someone) correct me if I am wrong, but perhaps the
>>COMCARE EPAD system would be a repository/registry solution.
>>So, I agree that current DHS and DoD requirements are very valid and those
>>requirements must be answered by EDXL. But let's make sure we remain
>>balanced in our approach so that other communities outside DoD and DHS are
>>also fairly represented at that CAP and EDXL have used well beyond.
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Ellis, David" <dellis@sandia.gov>
>>To: "SIA Pilot-6" <sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net>;
>>Cc: "Harry Haury" <hhaury@nuparadigm.com>; "Haleftiras, Pericles"
>><phaleftiras@systechnologies.com>; "Glaser, Ronald" <rfglase@sandia.gov>
>>Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:11 AM
>>Subject: [emergency] EDXL-DE routing and valueListUrn
>>I have a reasonably mature strategy for creating valueListUrn lists and
>>how they can be used to deploy a national architecture for Alerting and
>>Warning.  I have been trying to develop this to support Chips Disaster
>>Management efforts (e.g. EDXL-RM) and to allow for national sensor
>>capabilities (e.g. DNDO) to have the EDXL-DE routing system (execution
>>context) which provides the following capabilities:
>>1. Allow for establishment of Communities of Interest (COIs) where
>>appropriate authority can establish roles of entities, information
>>routing rules between them and issue certificate to ensure
>>authentication and authorization.
>>2. Permit interaction between COIs to instantiate robust MOUs enforced
>>by execution context allowing creation of national information grid.
>>3. Permit secure delivery of multiple levels of sensitive information
>>via signing, encryption and labeling within the EDXL-DE.
>>4. Allow abstraction of the implementation details (what) so national
>>planners can implement various operational concepts (documented in
>>DoDAF, FEA etc.) with minimal confusion on "how" it is accomplished.
>>I have tried to engage NIEM for over one year to explain these concepts
>>without success.  There is finally understanding between the various
>>standards organization on how important this is to major government
>>implementations.  On the other hand, major information providers are
>>claim our capabilities either don't exist or have never been
>>demonstrated.  Both are not true and in fact the EDXL-DE is being used
>>in an operational system within the DoD.  Unfortunately, it is not
>>branded as EDXL-DE since we have not issued the EDXL-DE OASIS standard
>>I need as many of the organization implementing EDXL-DE to attempt
>>sending outputs from your applications to the developing EDXL-DE routing
>>capability at NuParadigm in Saint Louis or our capability at Sandia
>>National Laboratories.  Also, a generic ability to wrap CAP messages in
>>EDXL has been created and we need to discuss the security implications
>>of doing this from local applications or by the "execution context" for
>>legacy/warning-only CAP applications.
>>I need to be able to list all the capabilities of your applications even
>>if they use explicated routing (e.g. DMIS COGs) and have no security
>>capability.  The design of our governments emerging national
>>capabilities is moving at lighting speed and EDXL-DE capabilities needs
>>to be a substantial portion of it.  Attached are two briefings present
>>this past week on sensor routing.
>>David E. Ellis
>>Information Management Architect
>>(505) 844-6697
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: sia-pilot6-bounces@humanml.cim3.net
>>On Behalf Of Elysa Jones
>>Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:23 AM
>>To: Rex Brooks
>>Cc: sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
>>Subject: Re: [sia-pilot6] [emergency] EDXL-DE Committee Draft
>>Yes, that is a good point.  I too want us to start coming up with these
>>"managed lists" knowing full well that NIEM wont be providing us
>>in the near term.  I had thought too that we could use the event list,
>>incident type, etc. that were provided in the original draft hand off as
>>starting place.  Maybe we should put these in examples and put them in
>>cookbook?  I too think the Govt agencies will not step up to this for
>>time and I am glad the registry is being developed in the pilot.  We do
>>need another company though that can sign up for the "use" for the
>>committee specification phase.  I seem to be focused most these days on
>>jumping through the hoops for ratification.  Regards, Elysa
>>At 10:07 AM 2/25/2006, Rex Brooks wrote:
>>>Just to clarify, it isn't DMIS or IEM that needs to have a keyword/list
>>>place, but they do need to be using some values in those fields that
>>>be recognized and used by all of us, or by others that need and have
>>>permissions to do so. We didn't address that level of permissions, and
>>>doubt that anyone will start restricting these initial efforts, but it
>>>another place where security measures can be imposed if appropriate,
>>>since our pilot is building a registry where these pointers or the
>>>resources can reside, I wanted to mention it.  While I want to be fair
>>>gov agencies, I suspect they will have a more difficult time getting
>>>funding resources, considering the Congress' recent actions with regard
>>>"any" already approved E-Gov program movement of monies preparatory to
>>>actual spending, the chances are good that what the organizations in
>>>TC actually produce will be the default system for quite some time to
>>>come, so I want to suggest to everyone that they bear that in mind and
>>>approach work going forward in the next six months or so as if this
>>>be all the system there will be for the next year. Once what we build
>>>shows that it works, then I suspect there will quickly be a wealth of
>>>resources available.
>>>At 4:12 AM -0600 2/25/06, Elysa Jones wrote:
>>>>Hey Rex, Welcome back.  I hope your trip went well.  As for the 3
>>>>of the EDXL-DE, I think Sandia, IEM and DMIS volunteered to make the
>>>>statement about "use."  We wont be able to use Sandia though since
>>>>has an individual membership.  I'll put a note out to the list shortly
>>>>ask who will be our third and if there is any keywords they must have
>>>>place.  Elysa
>>>>At 10:15 PM 2/24/2006, Rex Brooks wrote:
>>>>>Yes, this is all true,
>>>>>However, we still need 3 member organizations to vouch that they
>>>>>it as part of the move to an OASIS-wide vote, so we need to be
>>implmenting it.
>>>>>P.S. This means that we need to get an EventType Keyword/List and
>>>>>Sender/Recipient Keybord/List, etc, published by the appropriate
>>>>>>Hey Tim,
>>>>>>Yes, the next TC call is 3/9.  Whether we pull it now and make a
>>>>>>or wait until another round we could still not get it to a final
>>>>>>vote until May given the calendar process requirements. The
>>>>>>Draft has to be to OASIS for 5 business days before going to 15 day
>>>>>>review and must be back from 15 day review, comments addressed,
>>>>>>Committee Specification and back to OASIS by the 15th of the month
>>>>>>prior to the ratification vote.  We are on a tight schedule for a
>>>>>>the last 2 weeks of April even if we receive no substantive
>>>>>>Thanks for your input,
>>>>>>At 12:31 PM 2/22/2006, Tim Grapes wrote:
>>>>>>>Do I correctly recall that our next TC meeting won't be conducted
>>>>>>>March 9?  If so, I recommend we lay out our cards now in case
>>anyone feels
>>>>>>>the option to pull back and re-publish is warranted.
>>>>>>>My input is that this is simply a typo that can be corrected after
>>>>>>>15-day review.   However, if others feel the error truly is
>>substantive, I
>>>>>>>feel we should pull it back, make the correction, and republish
>>>>>>>than incurring an additional 15-day public comment.
>>>>>>>Tim Grapes
>>>>>>>Evolution Technologies, Inc.
>>>>>>>Disaster Management egov Initiative
>>>>>>>Science and Technology Directorate/OIC
>>>>>>>Department of Homeland Security
>>>>>>>Office:  (703) 654-6075
>>>>>>>Mobile:  (703) 304-4829
>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>From: Elysa Jones 
>>>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:06 PM
>>>>>>>To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>>>>>>>Subject: [emergency] EDXL-DE Committee Draft
>>>>>>>TC Members,
>>>>>>>As discussed on our call yesterday, there are a couple of issues
>>with the
>>>>>>>EDXL-DE that have been brought to light from within the TC.  We are
>>>>>>>able to make any changes to the posted documents until after the 15
>>>>>>>review.  That review is schedule to end March 4.  The only comments
>>so far
>>>>>>>have come from within the TC although I fully expect some comments
>>as the
>>>>>>>end draws near.  The most significant comment is the problem with
>>>>>>>schema not matching the DOM.  The DOM is correct and the place most
>>>>>>>look for understanding of what is presented.
>>>>>>>I have discussed our situation with Mary McRae, our OASIS staff
>>contact to
>>>>>>>determine our most efficient method to proceed.  She said that if
>>in the
>>>>>>>mind of the TC, the schema would be considered non-normative, it
>>could be
>>>>>>>changed as any other typo or correction that is non-substantive
>>after the
>>>>>>>15-day review is complete.
>>>>>>>If we do feel that the correction of the schema is substantive,
>>>>>>>15-day comment period would be required.  In that case, we could
>>pull the
>>>>>>>current 15-day review, make the change and re-publish.  Or we could
>>>>>>>until this period is over, make our corrections and re-post for
>>>>>>>15-day review.  In either case, the document has to go to OASIS by
>>>>>>>of the month prior to the month of the vote.  With a successful
>>>>>>>review in this round, we will be able to submit to OASIS by the
>>15th of
>>>>>>>March and thus an OASIS wide vote the last 2 weeks of April.  A
>>>>>>>15-day review no matter how it happens will postpone the OASIS wide
>>>>>>>until the last 2 weeks of May.
>>>>>>>That is where we stand now and there is no real need for a decision
>>>>>>>point.  Please consider whether you feel the incorrect schema is
>>>>>>>substantive or not and let me know the will of the TC as to how we
>>>>>>>Elysa Jones
>>>>>>>Chair, OASIS EM-TC
>>>>>>>Engineering PRogram Manager
>>>>>>>Warning Systems, Inc.
>>>>>>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
>>>>>>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs
>>>>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date:
>>>>>>>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>>>>Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.0.0/266 - Release Date:
>>>>>>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
>>>>>Rex Brooks
>>>>>President, CEO
>>>>>Starbourne Communications Design
>>>>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>>>>>Berkeley, CA 94702
>>>>>Tel: 510-849-2309
>>>Rex Brooks
>>>President, CEO
>>>Starbourne Communications Design
>>>GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
>>>Berkeley, CA 94702
>>>Tel: 510-849-2309
>>  _________________________________________________________________
>>Message Archives: 
>>To Post: 
>>Shared Files: 
>>CWE Portal: <http://humanml.cim3.net/>http://humanml.cim3.net/
>>Community Wiki: 
>>>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  > 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>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 
>>  _________________________________________________________________
>>Message Archives: http://humanml.cim3.net/forum/sia-pilot6/
>>To Post: mailto:sia-pilot6@humanml.cim3.net
>>Shared Files: http://humanml.cim3.net/file/work/project/sia-pilot6/
>>CWE Portal: http://humanml.cim3.net/
>>Community Wiki: http://humanml.cim3.net/wiki/
> -- 
> 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 
> 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]