Elysa et al
We did nail down a position for HAVE –
the Statement of Use will be based on the conformance section in the Standard.
For HAVE, we have defined the conformance targets and provided a definition of a
I am not sure why we are revisiting this
issue - the below positions seem to be specific to RM, and if so, it should
dealt in the conformance section for RM. I will let the MSG SC members weigh in
on this – but, I am sure they have discussed this to some extent. I am
not in favor of overloading the statement of use.
From: Elysa Jones
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008
Subject: [emergency] Use Case
We would like to nail down the TC's consensus on what constitutes a "Use
case" in our Standards. Most of you have been aware of this topic
but we have not nailed down a position. We must do this before we can
make the big push to get use cases for HAVE and RM.
This topic came up during the EIC meeting yesterday. There are several
EIC members that know of companies that may want to be the first or one of the
first to advertise such a use case. We need to give them specific wording
on what constitutes this "use". OASIS requires the statement to
be in agreement with the conformance clause of the specification. We as a
TC can cause this to be more or less stringent and there are schools of thought
Please review the two positions on the matter identified below and respond to
the list on your preference. Although this does not require a formal vote
of the TC, I want to make sure we have a good understanding and consensus on
how we proceed.
- Comply with the full element reference model -
required elements at a minimum. If a message is sent that complies
with the ERM, then you can be compliant with any of the specific messages.
- Deliver a RequestResource message and a
ResponsetoRequestResource message (just 2 messages).
If a vendor does either or, for purposes of statement of use and
getting the standard out the door, this should be the minimum requirement.
- Agreed with position 1
- A complete lifecycle of a "successful"
Resource Deployment should be the minimum:
The messages about the deployment, requesting information, release, etc are not
necessary, just the 5 listed.
NOW - please make your comments to the list. The Mst/Not SC will schedule
a meeting either Fri (4/18) or Mon (4/21) to discuss. From this a
recommendation will be made. Respond to this message too with which date
and what times you would be available.
Chair, OASIS EM-TC
Warning Systems, Inc.