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: CAP 1.1 Standard and ITU-T Recommendation - TC Task 2 - References

Hi Elysa,

I reviewed the references in the ITU XML Document 
and attached my report on them. One URL was 
wrong, and they cite our work in their XML Schema 
rather than Art's incident.com. I supplied the 
excerpts in the attached document.

They use many normative references which they 
declare explicitly in the References Section and 
include them in places in the data dictionary, 
such as resource-digest where the SHA spec for 
secure hash algorithm is cited.

Mime Types which we specify in the DOM but do not 
call out every time it is required in the data 
dictionary is another example. Also, for Mime 
Types, we cite RFC 1521 and ITU cites RFC 
2046-1996. I don't know how we should handle 
this. They explicitly cite XML Signature and 
Emcyrption specs from W3C, which we don't.

These were the examples I found that I consider 
to be possibly, but not necessarily, problematic. 
Unfortunately I don't have time to go over the 
two specs with a fine tooth comb today. I could 
put it on the schedule for the weekend, but even 
then, I have several projects hanging fire that 
make it difficult to guarantee I can complete 
this task in the required detail.

This is not identical to our spec, but it does 
not, at first glance, appear to be a conflict. 
However, we should consider it.


At 11:18 AM -0500 4/26/07, Elysa Jones wrote:
>Hey Rex,  Thanks so much for having a look at 
>the references.  Note, I have changed this 
>thread to be the Task 2 - References discussion. 
>At 10:21 AM 4/26/2007, Rex Brooks wrote:
>>Hi Elysa, All,
>>The best I can do is to look at 2 as much as I 
>>am able. I am in the last all-day face-to-face 
>>SOA-RA meeting via teleconference today and I 
>>have another meeting either late today (4:00 
>>p.m. my time) or tomorrow morning, so Friday 
>>afternoon-evening is best for me.
>>At 9:12 AM -0500 4/26/07, Elysa Jones wrote:
>>>Dear TC Members,
>>>As we were busy with our face to face meeting 
>>>last week the ITU folks were busy working on 
>>>integrating our CAP 1.1 Standard into their 
>>>format and process.  They produced two 
>>>recommendations that are attached for your 
>>>The first is to be an exact representation of 
>>>our existing CAP 1.1 Standard in the ITU 
>>>Recommendation format.  They were required by 
>>>their guidelines and process to make changes 
>>>to some of the normative references we used. 
>>>Other than that it is supposed to be a match. 
>>>The second attachment is a recommendation for 
>>>the addition of ASN.1 encoding.
>>>The ITU team has requested that we respond by 
>>>May 1 on these recommendations.  I have been 
>>>working with OASIS Staff to consider how to 
>>>move forward as expeditiously as possible. 
>>>Different members of the staff are working to 
>>>ensure we follow the proper IPR, process, etc. 
>>>For example, ASN.1 needs to be "contributed" 
>>>to OASIS for this purpose.
>>>If we agree as a TC that this is indeed a 
>>>complete and correct description of our 
>>>Standard and we agree to accept the ASN.1 
>>>encoding that it is technically equivalent to 
>>>our Standard, and therefore non-substantive, 
>>>we could process this document through the 
>>>OASIS process as an errata.  This appears to 
>>>be the most efficient way to proceed given the 
>>>OASIS process.
>>>The changes to the normative references need 
>>>to be studied in some detail.  It has also 
>>>been noted that in ITU recommendation that in 
>>>the DOM, Response Type is not specified 
>>>correctly. It is, however, correct in their 
>>>Data Dictionary.  They did not have the 
>>>benefit of the correction to "assess".  As you 
>>>recall, we listed "assess" in our data 
>>>dictionary but it was not listed in the schema 
>>>and we have already prepared errata document 
>>>for that (thanks to Patti and Rex).  This 
>>>errata has been voted on by the TC but not yet 
>>>submitted for 15-day public comment.
>>>Since there is already one noted discrepancy 
>>>in the ITU recommendation (between their DOM 
>>>and data dictionary), I am hopeful that they 
>>>will make this minor correction as well as the 
>>>one for "assess" and we can move forward 
>>>without them having to go through another 
>>>recommendation cycle.  I think we are all in 
>>>agreement that it would be best if these 
>>>Standards can track directly and do not 
>>>With there only being less than a week for us 
>>>to meet their requested response time, I am 
>>>hopeful that all of you will take a good hard 
>>>look at these changes and post any 
>>>questions/comments to the list.  If we break 
>>>this task up into pieces, it may help.  The 
>>>more eyes the better.
>>>1.  Read/compare documents word for word and list any discrepancies
>>>2.  Study the normative references to be sure they are correct
>>>3.  Validate the ASN.1 notation is a correct 
>>>representation and technically equivalent to 
>>>the XML schema
>>>Jamie Clark and I are doing #1, others please 
>>>join in.  Could a couple of you agree to comb 
>>>through the references and compare?  Is there 
>>>one or more of our members who are (or have 
>>>access to someone that is)  ASN.1 
>>>knowledgeable that can verify the ASN schema, 
>>>please identify yourself and work this part.
>>>Please respond to this note with your 
>>>willingness to take on a task, then we can 
>>>start a discussion list on each task.  Also 
>>>with your response, let me know 2 or 3 times 
>>>when you would be available for a telecon to 
>>>discuss over the next few days.  I suggest we 
>>>schedule one for either Thurs or Fri evening 
>>>when Renato and Karen might be available and 
>>>possibly one for Sunday or Monday evening.  We 
>>>have a normally scheduled TC meeting on Tues, 
>>>May 1 where we can do any final voting that 
>>>may be necessary. Other suggestions welcomed.
>>>In the interest of public safety worldwide, 
>>>let's take this time to get this work 
>>>complete! However, let's make sure it is 
>>>correct.  Thanks to all of you and your hard 
>>>work and contributions.
>>>Warm regards,
>>>Elysa Jones, Chair
>>>Program Manager
>>>Warning Systems, Inc.
>>>256-880-8702 x102
>>>256-694-8702 (cell)
>>>Attachment converted: Macintosh 
>>>HD:COM17-LS179-Attcht11.doc (WDBN/«IC») 
>>>Attachment converted: Macintosh 
>>>HD:COM17-LS179-Attcht21.doc (WDBN/«IC») 
>>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

ReferencesReport-ITU Document COM17LS179-Attacht11.doc

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