[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment?
Hi Folks, Just so y'all know, MITRE will be getting into this now that they're as an FFRDC for DHS CIO office/department. I just gave a brief overview of the fact that OASIS EDXL scope is international unless specifically identified as a national effort, e.g. CAP-IPAWS Profile, while NIEM is national in scope and UCORE is national-governmental in scope. In case I didn't repeat the "s" word enough, the overlaps for interoperability need to be addressed in terms of scope. I don't think that aligning or harmonizing various EDXL vocabularies/datamodels with NIEM necessarily involves subordinating or attempting to contain EDXL within NIEM, but since I don't work with this day in day out, I'll let those who do explain where the rough patches occur. I'm confident that with sufficient open communication, we can get these various efforts working together. Cheers, Rex At 9:06 AM -0400 7/14/09, Timothy Grapes wrote: >David, > >Actually this could be headed in the direction >of a true interoperability issue. It appears >that you do not see the value of keeping HAVE >and other EDXL standards (and perhaps the many >other standards out there) as separate, approved > external standards in the NIEM world. This is >absolutely essential - attempting to force all >of EDXL and other standards into NIEM will only >cause difficulty for BOTH sets of efforts. > There are many examples and arguments that may >be cited. > >Using adapters for NIEM to connect to the >approved standard plus providing NIEM access to >an emergency management data dictionary makes >sense and adds value, but attempting to >"integrate" EDXL into NIEM will get in the way >of real usability in the long run. >Thanks, >Tim Grapes >Evotec >"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt" >- Henry J. Kaiser > >From: David RR Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info] >Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 5:18 PM >To: Timothy Grapes >Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Lee Tincher' >Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? > >Tim, > >Intriguing! > >Good news however is that I received a response >from Donna Roy on the LinkedIn NIEm focus group >- saying that 2.1 should address gaps in domains >- and that beta will be available for review. > >So I'm feeling more relaxed about this - and >look forward to reviewing when available. > Obviously I'll let our team here know as soon >as I hear anything in that regard. > >Thanks, DW > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? >From: "Timothy Grapes" <tgrapes@evotecinc.com> >Date: Mon, July 13, 2009 7:23 am >To: "'David RR Webber (XML)'" <david@drrw.info>, "'Lee Tincher'" ><ltincher@evotecinc.com> >Cc: <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org> >This is a much more complicated issue than can >be discussed via email. The issue has been >worked literally for years, and now again >another effort to work with NIEM without them >enforcing rules that do not work for this domain >and without breaking EDXL standards. We need to >let the governance and this "pilot" that is >being put forth to play out. That governance is >through a partnership between OIC and FEMA with >the knowledge and cooperation of OASIS and >others that have tracked this issue for so long. >It may now get solved in 2.1 (or at least a path >forward for governance and cooperation), but >we'll see. > >Thanks, >Tim Grapes >Evotec >"When your work speaks for itself, don't interrupt" >- Henry J. Kaiser > >From: David RR Webber (XML) [<mailto:david@drrw.info>mailto:david@drrw.info] >Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 8:44 PM >To: Lee Tincher >Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? > >Lee, > >I'm looking for one piece of XML - no xslt >band-aiding and most certainly NOT one standard >for use - and another for publication in the >IEPD. The schema et al in the IEPD should be >identical to what is being used in actual >production. > >Thanks, DW > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? >From: "Lee Tincher" <ltincher@evotecinc.com> >Date: Sun, July 12, 2009 8:38 pm >To: "'David RR Webber (XML)'" <david@drrw.info> >Cc: <emergency@lists.oasis-open.org> >Uhmmm - isn't that exactly what I just said we are doing? > >Thanks, >Lee > >"I was wondering why that Frisbee was getting bigger - then it hit me." > >From: David RR Webber (XML) [<mailto:david@drrw.info>mailto:david@drrw.info] >Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 4:12 PM >To: Lee Tincher >Cc: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? > >Lee, > >IMHO - that makes zero sense! Band-aiding like that is nasty... > >Obviously best outcome is to put the HAVE pieces in NIEM 2.1 > >Failing that - having an extended dictionary >that includes the new HAVE pieces - so we can >generate two wantlists.xml automatically. One >that works with the SSGT - and one that works >locally - and will include the missing pieces as >extensions.xsd into the subset schema. > >What we need poste haste though is the exact >list of missing parts. I have the >cross-reference dictionary between EDXL HAVE and >current NIEM 2.0 - that should work as pick list >of things that need to be added. > >Thanks, DW > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: RE: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? >From: "Lee Tincher" <ltincher@evotecinc.com> >Date: Sun, July 12, 2009 10:28 am >To: "'David RR Webber (XML)'" <david@drrw.info>, ><emergency@lists.oasis-open.org> >They are not - we have added in HAVE entities to >the em domain and we also created an "adapter" >to point to the actual OASIS standard. This si >being done so we can create a mirror IEPD of >HAVE that has a one-to-one matchŠthe idea is to >create an XSLT that translates between the HAVE >IEPD and the "real" standard that can be carried >in the digest of a SOAP messageŠ. > >Thanks, >Lee > >"I was wondering why that Frisbee was getting bigger - then it hit me." > >From: David RR Webber (XML) [<mailto:david@drrw.info>mailto:david@drrw.info] >Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2009 12:46 AM >To: emergency@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: [emergency] EDXL HAVE and NIEM 2.1 dictionary alignment? >Importance: High > >Team, > >I've finally managed to crack the wantlist.xml >processing against the online GTRI SSGT and NIEM >2.0 dictionary working for the HospitalStatus >schema and using CAM compare to dictionary tool >to reverse engineer the wantlist from the schema. > ><http://niem.gtri.gatech.edu/niemtools/ssgt/SSGT-Generate.iepd>http://niem.gtri.gatech.edu/niemtools/ssgt/SSGT-Generate.iepd# > >I've attached the sample wantlist.xml if you >want to try this yourselves (click on the >"Options" - far top right - and then you will >see a select file and load buttons). > >Now - when reviewing this - you will notice a >raft of gml elements are missing (only a short >list are there) - PLUS - there are many missing >em: items. > >So the key questions is - are these all missing >ones now added into the new NIEM 2.1 dictionary >release that is scheduled for September? > >If not someone needs to contact GTRI very >quickly this week - to make sure these will be >added. > >And if we could get a beta test of the Access >database of the new NIEM 2.1 then would be best >so we can crosscheck it all. > >Thanks, DW > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must >leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. >Follow this link to 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 -- 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]