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: [emergency] RE: Sample email to interested parties WRT geo enhancements to CAP

Thanks Art,

These are all important considerations, and not easy or simple. So, 
all I can say right now is that we need to think about it, chew on 
it, discuss it and see what we can come up with.

Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving,


At 9:20 AM -0800 11/21/07, Art Botterell wrote:
>Friends -
>We may want to think a bit more about the "what" before we dive too 
>deeply into the "how."  Experience has revealed some ambiguities in 
>the semantics of the existing CAP geospatial elements, and I think 
>addressing those may help us understand better exactly what sort of 
>geospatial elements will best meet the functional requirements.
>One of those ambiguities has to do with whether the CAP Area element 
>describes the area directly affected by a hazard, the location of 
>the hazard itself, or the area to which information about the hazard 
>should be routed.  All three are legitimate topics, but they don't 
>necessarily raise the same requirements.  I'm not sure, for example, 
>that there would be any meaningful use of a line or point in 
>describing an affected area or a message-targeting area, while a 
>hazard location might be a point and a hazard in motion (see below) 
>might be described as a line or an unterminated vector.
>The temporal dimension is another aspect I'm thinking we may not 
>have addressed fully.  Currently the only formal way to describe 
>motion or trends in CAP is by means of a set of Info blocks each 
>with its own <effective> and <expires> values... in effect, a set of 
>"key frames" which might or might not imply some continual 
>transition between the described states.  I notice that NWS has 
>recently started adding motion vectors (starting location, direction 
>and rate) to its geospatial descriptions in storm warnings.
>And of course one of the long-standing requirements for CAP 
>generally is that it be easy to process on autonomous devices with 
>various kinds and degrees of connectivity.  That's why I have some 
>anxiety about the idea of supporting multiple coordinate systems... 
>do we risk making it impractical for lightweight devices to know 
>about all the possible coordinate systems?  My mind is open on that, 
>but I hope we'll keep in mind the differences between the 
>requirements for a full-blown GIS application and those for a 
>portable (e.g., wristwatch-sized) or embedded system.
>- Art
>Art Botterell, Manager
>Community Warning System
>Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff
>50 Glacier Drive
>Martinez, California 94553
>(925) 313-9603
>fax (925) 646-1120
>>>>  "Carl Reed OGC Account" <creed@opengeospatial.org> 11/16/2007 11:44 AM >>>
>Hi All -
>We would like to get this email out to all interested CAP parties so 
>that we can collect requirements and move forward. I originally sent 
>this email in September and only heard from Rex. Other feedback 
>would be appreciated.
>Thanks and regards
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Carl Reed OGC Account
>To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org
>Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:24 AM
>Subject: [emergency] RE: Sample email to interested parties WRT geo 
>enhancements to CAP
>A bit tardy :-)
>First stab at a letter to interested party to collect additional 
>requirements for geo enhancements to CAP and by extension to EDXL.
>Dear < >
>CAP has now been widely implemented. As a result, we are beginning 
>to receive considerable feedback regarding implementation 
>experience, especially in the realm of requirements for enhanced 
>capabilities to express additional (and richer) geographic elements. 
>Some suggestions have been to allow additional coordinate reference 
>systems in addition to WGS-84, the ability to encode point, line, 
>and route features, and the ability to reference the output of a 
>plume model have been suggested.
>Therefore, in order to document a consistent set of requirements for 
>potential enhancement or extensions to CAP, we are seeking your 
>input and experience. Please note that we are not seeking input on 
>how to change CAP or to implement changes in CAP. We are instead 
>seeking either use cases or new requirements for 
>using/encoding/referencing geospatial content in a CAP message.
>Thank you for your help and consideration.
>Carl Reed (CTO, OGC)
>OASIS Emergency Management TC GIS SC Chair.
>Carl Reed, PhD
>CTO and Executive Director Specification Program
>The OGC: Helping the World to Communicate Geographically
>This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use 
>of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged 
>information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, 
>copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly 
>prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the 
>sender  immediately by return email and delete this communication 
>and destroy all copies.
>"The important thing is not to stop questioning." -- Albert Einstein
>"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature. 
>Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." -- Helen Keller
>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

Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670

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